Functional link between foraging performance, functional morphology, and diet shift in roach (<i>Rutilus rutilus</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores how feeding performance (size-dependent attack rate) and the diet shift from zooplankton to benthic macroinvertebrates in the fish species roach (Rutilus rutilus L.) is related to changes in functional morphology over ontogeny. The morphological changes included overall body shape and structures of the feeding apparatus. The foraging performance of roach on zooplankton, as a function of size, was hump-shaped with a maximum of ~160 mm, and the diet shift took place around 150 mm. Over ontogeny, roach body shape gradually changed from fusiform into high-bodied. The second principal component (PC2) of the feeding apparatus had a U-shaped relationship with body size, with a minimum at 140-mm total length, which is the inverse of that found for the foraging performance on zooplankton. We suggest that changes of the feeding apparatus affect prey intake during the early zooplanktivorous phases and at the final benthivorous feeding stage, whereas prey retention ability limits the maximum intake rate at a later phase of the zooplanktivorous feeding stage. Our results also suggest the presence of both positive and negative correlations in morphology between the feeding niches, which point to the occurrence of morphological trade-offs within ontogenetic niches.
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".