Forage selection by collared pikas,<i>Ochotona collaris</i>, under varying degrees of predation risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of predation risk on foraging behavior often result in a trade-off between obtaining food and seeking shelter and may alter the selectivity of herbivores for individual plant species. We experimentally measured forage selection by a small alpine herbivore, the collared pika (Ochotona collaris (Nelson, 1893)), using a cafeteria-style arrangement of six potential forage species at five levels of predation risk. Contrary to our prediction, haying pikas did not switch preferences for forage species of different nutritional quality as predation risk increased. However, the total amount of forage removed was inversely related to risk, and the addition of cover at treatments of greatest potential risk ameliorated the negative effects of higher predation risk. The reasons for increased preference for poorer quality forage species in 2002 relative to 2000 are currently unknown but may reflect changes in predator abundance, forage quality, or increased competition for limited forage resources.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".