Spatial and temporal patterns of habitat use by three estuarine species of mysid shrimp
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mysids Rhopalopthalmus egregius, Haplostylus dakini and Doxomysis australiensis are abundant yet unstudied omnivorous crustaceans in Australian estuaries. Habitat use and population dynamics were investigated for these species over spring and summer in the Tweed River, Australia, to explore their ecological role in estuarine ecosystems. Overall, mysids were concentrated in shallow unvegetated and deep unvegetated estuarine habitats. H. dakini were most abundant in shallow and deep bare habitats at night, whereas R. egregius were most abundant in deep bare habitats during the night. D. australiensis were present across all habitats in the night, but negligible numbers were present during the day. Significantly greater numbers of R. egregius and D. australiensis were sampled during the new moon, compared with the full moon. Significantly larger R. egregius and D. australiensis individuals were present in benthic habitats at night, indicating possible partitioning of habitat for juvenile and adult subpopulations. Adaptive foraging strategies and habitat use facilitates the coexistence of sympatric mysid species, H. dakini and R. egregius, and within-species habitat partitioning allowed juvenile R. egregius to avoid interaction with adult R. egregius. The observed dynamics minimize inter- and intra-specific predation between mysids, and by other predators, while optimizing access to key trophic 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".