The role of Spadefoot Toad tadpoles in wetland trophic structure as influenced by environmental and morphological factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Larval amphibians reach high densities in playa wetlands in the Southern Great Plains (SGP), USA, and thus may influence the entire structure and function of these ecosystems. We investigated whether both carnivorous and omnivorous morphotypes of Spadefoot Toad tadpoles (New Mexico Spadefoot, Spea multiplicata (Cope, 1863), and Plains Spadefoot, Spea bombifrons (Cope, 1863)) would exhibit a macrophagous feeding behavior that would allow them to occupy several trophic levels in playas. We also compared tadpole diets and foregut widths as influenced by the land use surrounding playas (cultivated versus grassland watersheds), year (dry versus wet year), and body size (snout-to-vent length). Tadpole diets were dominated by detritus and diatoms and tadpole foreguts increased with body size. Generally, more arthropods and less cyanobacteria were found in Spea tadpole diets as tadpoles grew larger, suggesting they influence different trophic levels with age. Foreguts were wider in carnivores than omnivores, suggesting carnivores had increased ability to ingest larger prey. Also, omnivores had wider foreguts in cropland than grassland playas, suggesting they ingest larger food items in cropland playas. From estimates of the amounts of invertebrates, detritus, and algae consumed by Spea tadpoles, we demonstrate that these larvae influence the entire trophic structure of wetland ecosystems.
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 | 0.001 | 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".