Predator threat assessment in Daphnia magna: the role of kairomones versus conspecific alarm cues
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studying the finely tuned mechanism of predation risk assessment allows for a better understanding of how prey organisms make key decisions under different levels of predation pressure. We studied the relative importance of conspecific alarm cues and fish kairomones as initiators of D. magna antipredator defences. By exposing a clone of D. magna to different infochemicals that simulated the presence of an active fish predator, we observed cue-specific responses in terms of altered feeding behaviour, respiration and life-history traits. Results agreed with the hypothesis that D. magna processes information from alarm cues from macerated conspecifics and from predator kairomones to assess the level of predation risk, adjusting the magnitude of their responses to the different levels of threat perceived. Results support the findings of other investigations and further show that single cues (fish kairomones or alarm cues) triggered feeding reduction and increased oxygen consumption, whereas fish kairomones only elicited D. magna life-history responses. Prey-specific alarm cues can thus modify the response of Daphnia to trout kairomones and this combination of both chemical cues appears to be necessary to trigger the full deployment of antipredator responses and avoid unnecessary costs arising from maladaptive responses.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.005 | 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 it