The effect of prey availability on spider assemblages on European black pine (<i>Pinus nigra</i>) bark: spatial patterns and guild structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both habitat structural complexity and prey availability can influence the density and diversity of spider assemblages. We studied whether prey availability affects spider assemblages living on the bark of European black pine (Pinus nigra Arnold) in six localities in Hungary. We found both positive and negative relationships between spider and prey assemblages in a sample of 1290 spiders and 24 186 potential prey when among-locality variation in spider assemblages was controlled for. Species richness, number of individuals, and diversity of spiders increased with either the number of prey taxa or the number of prey individuals in a forest in western Hungary. Spider species richness and number of individuals increased with prey diversity but decreased with number of prey taxa in moderately air-polluted urban localities. There was a negative relationship between number of spider individuals and number of prey individuals in a heavily polluted urban locality. Numbers of nocturnal hunters but not diurnal hunters or web-builders increased with the number of their respective prey in the forest in western Hungary and in the moderately air-polluted urban localities. The number of exclusive bark-dwelling spiders increased with the number of prey individuals in forests in eastern Hungary and decreased with the number of prey individuals in the polluted urban locality. We suggest that patterns of spider assemblages can be influenced by prey availability and that other factors (e.g., habitat structural diversity and air pollution) also need to be considered in explaining these patterns.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".