Variability in escape trajectory in the Trinidadian stream frog and two treefrogs at different life-history stages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most studies investigating anuran jumping behaviour have examined the relationship between body size and parameters such as jump distance, velocity, and force; however, few have investigated jump trajectory. We constructed an arena to determine escape trajectories in relation to the direction of an artificial stimulus in the aromobatid Mannophryne trinitatis (Garman, 1888) and two treefrogs, Trachycephalus venulosus (Laurenti, 1768) and Hypsiboas geographicus (Spix, 1824). Three categories of M. trinitatis (i.e., tadpole-transporting males, nontransporting males, and females) and three ontogenetic stages of the treefrogs were compared. Mannophryne trinitatis escaped in a broadly predictable trajectory away from the stimulus, although jump trajectories were highly variable, suggesting a degree of unpredictability. No systematic differences were found between categories of M. trinitatis, adding to the findings of previous studies that larval transport incurs no measurable locomotor costs on antipredatory jumping behaviour with regards to jump angle and distance. The treefrogs showed similar patterns of escape trajectory and unpredictability. There were no consistent differences between life-history stages and no relationship between distance jumped and angular deviation. In M. trinitatis and H. geographicus, there was some evidence of bimodality in escape trajectory. The results are discussed in the context of other work on escape trajectories and the concept of “protean” defence strategies.
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 | 0.001 | 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".