MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Interactions among young stages of the wolf spiders <i>Pardosa</i> <i>moesta</i> and <i>P</i> . <i>mackenziana</i> (Araneae: Lycosidae)

2002· article· en· W2018278709 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Christopher M. Buddle

Bibliographic record

VenueOikos · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSpider Taxonomy and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCannibalismPredationWolf spiderIntraspecific competitionBiologyCompetition (biology)EcologyIntraguild predationInterspecific competitionPredator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Young stages of the wolf spiders Pardosa moesta and P . mackenziana coexist on the forest floor in a deciduous forest in central Alberta, yet nothing is known of the potential interactions between and among these ubiquitous species. An experiment, using a series of 0.25‐m 2 arenas, was designed to test for inter‐ and intraspecific exploitative competition. Experimental treatments were established in the arenas in late July. Treatments involved stocking recently hatched spiderlings of each species alone, and with both species together at natural (10 spiderlings per arena) and two times the natural densities. In September the arenas were searched for Pardosa spiderlings, and the survival and mass gain of each species were determined. Other predatory arthropods, and Collembola, a common prey of young wolf spiders, were counted in the arenas before the experimental treatments were established and at the end of the experiment. No evidence for competitive interactions was uncovered, but spiderling survival was 29% for P . moesta and 20% for P . mackenziana , suggesting other mortality factors (e.g., cannibalism, intraguild predation) may be important. Top‐down effects (predatory arthropods) had no effect on Pardosa survival. Bottom‐up effects, however, were significant as treatments containing spiderlings had fewer Collembola compared to control arenas, further supporting the importance of spiders in leaf‐litter food webs.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.714

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations19
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOikosSame topicSpider Taxonomy and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207