MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018250525 · doi:10.1139/z04-185

Agonism and shelter competition between invasive and indigenous crayfish species

2004· article· en· W2018250525 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Francesca Gherardi, William H. Daniels

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLouisiana State UniversityClemson University
KeywordsCrayfishProcambarus clarkiiBiologyInvasive speciesDominance (genetics)EcologyIndigenousIntroduced speciesContext (archaeology)ZoologyFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several crayfish species behave as biological invaders. Their establishment in an area has frequently been accompanied by the reduction or elimination of indigenous species. A laboratory study was designed to investigate whether the invasive crayfish Procambarus clarkii (Girard, 1852) is dominant over the indigenous (to Delaware) crayfish Procambarus acutus acutus (Girard, 1852) in either the absence or the presence of a shelter as a limited resource. As expected, we found that P. clarkii is more aggressive than the similarly sized P. a. acutus, thus confirming previous studies that demonstrated an inherent dominance of the invasive over the indigenous crayfish. We then hypothesized that species showing a lower preference for an offered shelter (P. clarkii) should be less motivated to defend it. To the contrary, in a competitive context P. clarkii excluded P. a. acutus from the shelter but did not use the resource. Caution must be used in extrapolating these laboratory studies to the field, and future studies should analyze multiple factors, including the autoecology of the two species and their reproductive potential and recruitment patterns. However, our results might help in highlighting the risks for freshwater biodiversity created by the uncontrolled translocations of P. clarkii and other similar invasive species.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.179 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations93
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207