Unidirectional prey–predator facilitation: apparent prey enhance predators' foraging success on cryptic prey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Food availability can strongly affect predator-prey dynamics. When change in habitat condition reduces the availability of one prey type, predators often search for other prey, perhaps in a different habitat. Interactions between behavioural and morphological traits of different prey may influence foraging success of visual predators through trait-mediated indirect interactions (TMIIs), such as prey activity and body coloration. We tested the hypothesis that foraging success of stream-dwelling cutthroat trout (Onchorhyncus clarki) on cryptically coloured, less-active benthic prey (larval mayfly; Paraleptophebia sp.) can be enhanced by the presence of distinctly coloured, active prey (larval stonefly shredder; Despaxia augusta). Cutthroat trout preyed on benthic insects when drifting invertebrates were unavailable. When stonefly larvae were present, the trout ate most of the stoneflies and also consumed a higher proportion of mayflies than under mayfly only treatment. The putative mechanism is that active stonefly larvae supplied visual cues to the predator that alerted trout to the mayfly larvae. Foraging success of visual predators on cryptic prey can be enhanced by distinctly coloured, active benthic taxa through unidirectional facilitation to the predators, which is a functional change of interspecific interaction caused by a third species. This study suggests that prey-predator facilitation through TMIIs can modify species interactions, affecting community dynamics.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".