MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115150872 · doi:10.1093/beheco/ars060

Influence of immediate predation risk by lions on the vigilance of prey of different body size

2012· article· en· W2115150872 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Ecology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsVigilance (psychology)PredationForagingPantheraBiologyEcologyPredatorHabitatZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects on vigilance behavior of environmental cues that affect perceived risk of predation have been widely measured in gregarious herbivores. How extrinsic (e.g., predator activity within certain habitats) and intrinsic (e.g., within-group competition) cues interact depends on the biology of the prey species. However, very little is known about the impact of the actual presence of the predator in the vicinity on fine scale prey vigilance behavior. For this study, we monitored the vigilance of plains zebra (Equus quagga) and impala (Aepyceros melampus) in and around Hwange National Park, Zimbabwe. We assessed how the presence of radio-collared lions (Panthera leo) affected the vigilance of their prey. To evaluate the factors affecting vigilance behavior, we measured routine and intense vigilance. Routine vigilance can be conducted while chewing, although during intense vigilance chewing is halted and thus imposes foraging costs as food processing is delayed. As the most acute form of vigilance, we predicted that the presence of lions would lead to an increase in intense vigilance in both species. We found this to be the case for zebra, a key prey species for lions, while impala adjusted their intense vigilance to risk cues less specific to the presence of lions. Potential predation risk posed by lions in the immediate vicinity differs not only between species but also for a given species in different contexts. Our results also reveal how other environmental risk indicators influence the structure of vigilance behavior of large prey species in a manner that reflects their respective ecologies.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.562

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.236 · 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