MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066830513 · doi:10.1017/s0025315414001210

The utility of wax replicas as a measure of crab attack frequency in the rocky intertidal

2014· article· en· W2066830513 on OpenAlexaff
Carrie L. Tyler, Emily S. Stafford, Lindsey R. Leighton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntertidal zonePredationBiologyNucellaEcologyFisheryPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crabs are thought to play a vital role in structuring gastropod populations. Studies quantifying the frequencies with which crabs attack gastropods in natural settings are, however, scarce. Although a wide variety of techniques exist with which predator–prey interactions can be investigated (e.g. laboratory experiments, exclusion caging, tethering and population surveys), there is a need for methods that can provide large amounts of quantitative data, particularly documenting the frequency with which crabs attack gastropods. This study examines the utility of using wax replicas of gastropods to determine crab attack frequencies. Replicas of Chlorostoma funebralis, Nucella ostrina and Nucella lamellosa were bolted to mesh screens and deployed in the rocky intertidal. Crabs attacked wax replicas of gastropods, leaving characteristic marks in the wax. In most cases, the appendage used in the attack could be identified from the marks (i.e. chelae vs walking legs). The effectiveness of this technique was verified using surveys of repair scar frequencies of the gastropod populations; patterns in attack frequency, determined from the number of marked wax replicas, were consistent with those of repair frequency, in that both were greater at the wave protected, quiet water locality. This study confirms the value of wax replicas in investigations of crab predation to determine the frequency and type of attack, and illustrates the potential of this method for quantifying predation intensity. The development of techniques that quantify the magnitude and exact nature of the effects of crab predation on intertidal communities is pivotal, given the intensity of commercial fishing of some species of crabs.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.700

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Marine Biological Association of the United KingdomSame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207