MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2143634780 · doi:10.1139/f07-120

A limited role for ultraviolet radiation when threespine sticklebacks (<i>Gasterosteus aculeatus</i>) prey upon<i>Daphnia</i>

2007· article· en· W2143634780 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ricarda Modarressie, Theo C. M. Bakker

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsGasterosteusForagingPredationBiologySticklebackUltravioletZoologyEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>FisheryOptoelectronicsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Any trait of predatory species that enhances hunting efficiency should be favoured by natural selection. Foraging in threespine sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus) is mainly visually mediated. The visual system of sticklebacks is extended into the ultraviolet (UV) range of the spectrum. We tested, in four different experimental setups, the influence of different spectral compositions, in particular the presence and absence of ultraviolet wavelengths, on the feeding performance of threespine sticklebacks while foraging on live Daphnia magna, which absorb UV. In the three experiments with similar background reflections, the foraging behaviour of sticklebacks was unaffected by removing UV wavelengths. But in the fourth experiment, sticklebacks showed a significant difference between the rate of detecting prey against a UV-reflecting or UV-absorbing background. Sticklebacks significantly attacked prey faster when the background lacked UV reflections. Thus, the interaction of prey with its background in UV wavelengths influenced sticklebacks' prey detection. Removing long wavelengths impaired foraging rate, suggesting that long wavelengths may be more important in foraging tasks than UV wavelengths.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations6
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction→French-language works237,207→