Predator, but not conspecific, chemical cues influence pond selection by recently metamorphosed Iberian green frogs,<i>Rana perezi</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In amphibians, adults and larvae have different ecological requirements that could force recently metamorphosed individuals to disperse. The presence of chemical cues of conspecifics and predators could provide information about habitat quality, which might influence the juveniles’ settlement decisions. We examined in the laboratory whether pond choice by recently metamorphosed Iberian green frogs ( Rana perezi Seoane, 1885) is influenced by the presence of chemical cues from conspecifics and (or) from predators in the water. Our results suggest that frogs were able to detect the presence of chemical cues of snake predators in the water and that they avoided entering such ponds. However, frogs did not show either attraction or avoidance of ponds with conspecific chemical cues. Thus, juvenile frogs may select their postmetamorphic territories based on the lack of predation risk, and possibly on some habitat features, but not on the presence of conspecifics.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".