MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039474962 · doi:10.4039/n04-088

Seasonal abundance and prey selection of the nymphs of three sympatric species of <i>Sympetrum</i> (Odonata: Libellulidae) in an intermittent pond

2005· article· en· W2039474962 on OpenAlexaffabout
Árni Magnússon

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Entomologist · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOdonataLibellulidaePredationEcologyDytiscidaeBiologyNymphWoodlandDragonfly

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Odonates are obligate predators (Pritchard 1964), and the composition of their diet is reflective of their microhabitat and effectiveness in detecting and capturing prey (Griffiths 1973; Thompson 1978). In an intermittent woodland pond in southern Ontario, Canada, three species of Sympetrum (Odonata: Libellulidae) were found to coexist: S. internum Montgomery, S. costiferum (Hagen), and S. obtrusum (Hagen). Sympetrum species spend most of their life cycle in the aquatic stage and consume prey at all nymphal stadia (Pritchard 1964; Corbet 1999). They overwinter in the egg stage, hatch in early spring, and typically emerge in late June to late July (Walker and Corbet 1975). To better understand the role of coexisting Sympetrum nymphs in this intermittent pond environment, and to evaluate potential mechanisms behind their coexistence, we collected seasonal abundance and body size data for 2 years and analyzed gut contents of each species. In addition, we experimentally tested the prey selection and predatory rate of two different size classes of Sympetrum nymphs and two of their potential competitors, Lestes sp. (Odonata: Lestidae) and Acilius sp. (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae), in laboratory microcosms.

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)0.000
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations5
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian EntomologistSame topicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecologyFrench-language works237,207