Once Bitten, Twice Shy: Does Previous Experience Influence Behavioural Decisions of Snakes in Encounters with Predators?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Injuries are common in animals of diverse taxa and are usually attributed to encounters with predators. Although often non‐lethal, injuries nevertheless represent effects of predators that can have negative consequences for demography and fitness (e.g. reproductive costs). However, encounters with predators also represent experience through which animals can learn and positively adapt their future behaviour, potentially mitigating, at least partly, the negative effects of prior exposure to predators. I predicted that injured grass snakes ( Natrix natrix ), which presumably had been handled previously by a predator, would be more likely to move before capture than uninjured snakes. This prediction was borne out. Snakes with injuries also had lower body condition than uninjured snakes, although the effect was non‐significant. Snakes that had been previously captured also were significantly more likely to move before capture than snakes that had never been caught before. These results provide strong evidence for the role of experience and learning in modifying the antipredator behaviour of snakes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".