The behavioural effects of predator-induced stress responses in the cricket (<i>Gryllus texensis</i>): the upside of the stress response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predator-induced stress responses are thought to reduce an animal's risk of being eaten. Therefore, these stress responses should enhance anti-predator behaviour. We found that individual insects (the cricket Gryllus texensis) show reliable behavioural responses (i.e. behavioural types) in a plus-shaped maze. An individual's behaviour in the plus maze remained consistent for at least 1/2 of its adult life. However, after exposure to a model predator, both male and female crickets showed a reduced period of immobility and an increased amount of time spent under shelter compared with controls. These changes could be mimicked by injections of the insect stress neurohormone octopamine. These behavioural changes probably aid crickets in evading predators. Exposure to a model predator increased the ability of crickets to escape a live predator (a bearded dragon, Pogona vitticeps). An injection of octopamine had the same effect, showing that stress hormones can reduce predation. Using crickets to study the fitness consequences of predator-induced stress responses will help integrate ecological and biomedical concepts of 'stress'.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".