MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120111310 · doi:10.1093/beheco/ari005

Cost/benefit analysis of group and solitary resting in the cowtail stingray, Pastinachus sephen

2004· article· en· W2120111310 on OpenAlexafffund
Christina A. D. Semeniuk, Lawrence M. Dill

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Ecology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersBritish Columbia Institute of TechnologyPADI Foundation
KeywordsStingrayBiologyPredationForagingPredatorVisibilityEcologyTransectUnderwaterBayFisheryOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unless a safe refuge is found where predation threats are negligible, resting poses risks for many animals, necessitating risk management strategies. The adult cowtail stingray (Pastinachus sephen) of Shark Bay, Western Australia, is a solitarily foraging animal that facultatively groups when resting on shallow, inshore sand flats. We hypothesized that environmental conditions influence the propensity of cowtails to group due to the limited ability to detect predators visually in certain conditions. We then explored the possible benefits of grouping, such as bodily protection, early warning, and predator confusion, in conjunction with potential grouping costs, such as increased interference when initiating flight and decreased escape speeds. Our study revealed that in poor underwater visibility (due to turbidity and/or low ambient light levels), cowtails primarily rest in small groups (three rays). Tests of flight initiation distance to a mock predator demonstrated that solitary cowtail escape distances are significantly shorter in poor than in good underwater visibility conditions. As to grouping benefits, filmed boat transects revealed that cowtails most often arrange themselves in a rosette position, possibly as a means to protect their bodies and expose their tails. The first cowtail in a group initiates flight to a mock predator at a significantly greater distance than a solitary cowtail, and grouped cowtails escape an approaching boat in a significantly more cohesive manner than a simulated group of escaping individual rays. Grouped cowtails exhibit behaviors that would impede immediate flight after detection. As a result, grouped rays escape a boat at significantly slower speeds than solitary cowtails. Results from this study demonstrate that the interplay between costs and benefits of grouped and solitary resting under differing environmental conditions is driven by differences in perceived predation risk and ultimately reflected in the facultative grouping behavior of this species.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations58
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral EcologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207