MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143755164 · doi:10.1890/07-1442.1

BIOFILM GRAZING IN A HIGHER VERTEBRATE: THE WESTERN SANDPIPER,<i>CALIDRIS MAURI</i>

2008· article· en· W2143755164 on OpenAlex
Tomohiro Kuwae, Peter G. Beninger, Priscilla Decottignies, Kimberley J. Mathot, Dieta R. Lund, Robert W. Elner

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIsotope Analysis in Ecology
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversité du Québec à MontréalSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalidrisGrazingHerbivoreEcologyBiologyIntertidal zoneInvertebrateSandpiperTrophic levelHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We show that a higher vertebrate can graze surficial intertidal biofilm, previously only considered a food source for rasping invertebrates and a few specialized fish. Using evidence from video recordings, stomach contents, and stable isotopes, we describe for the first time the grazing behavior of Western Sandpipers (Calidris mauri) and estimate that biofilm accounts for 45-59% of their total diet or 50% of their daily energy budget. Our finding of shorebirds as herbivores extends the trophic range of shorebirds to primary consumers and potential competitors with grazing invertebrates. Also, given individual grazing rates estimated at seven times body mass per day and flock sizes into the tens of thousands, biofilm-feeding shorebirds could have major impacts on sediment dynamics. We stress the importance of the physical and biological processes maintaining biofilm to shorebird and intertidal conservation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0080.004

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.208 · 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