MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145942157 · doi:10.3354/meps07299

Costs of group-living for a normally solitary forager: effects of provisioning tourism on southern stingrays Dasyatis americana

2007· article· en· W2145942157 on OpenAlexafffundabout
CAD Semeniuk, K. D. Rothley

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine Ecology Progress Series · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSimon Fraser UniversityFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsStingrayPredationProvisioningTourismResource (disambiguation)BiologyWildlifeEcologyPredatorFisheryGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MEPS Marine Ecology Progress Series Contact the journal Facebook Twitter RSS Mailing List Subscribe to our mailing list via Mailchimp HomeLatest VolumeAbout the JournalEditorsTheme Sections MEPS 357:271-282 (2008) - DOI: https://doi.org/10.3354/meps07299 Costs of group-living for a normally solitary forager: effects of provisioning tourism on southern stingrays Dasyatis americana Christina A. D. Semeniuk1,*, Kristina D. Rothley1,2 1School of Resource and Environmental Management, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Dr., Burnaby, British Columbia V5A 1S6, Canada 2Present address: Department of Biology, Kutztown University of Pennsylvania, 15200 Kutztown Rd., Kutztown, Pennsylvania 19530-0730, USA *Email: casemeni@sfu.ca ABSTRACT: Animals can perceive tourists as predators and will incur fitness costs should their predator-avoidance behaviours result in forgone resource acquisition. Not all wildlife, however, treat tourists as predators; animals can respond positively to tourists, especially when food is used as an attractant. We investigate the costs posed by novel grouping over a tourism-provisioned food resource in a normally solitary forager, the southern stingray Dasyatis americana, in Grand Cayman. Specifically, we test the hypotheses that group-living stingrays in a new environment—which includes both the presence of tourists and quickly renewing food patches—will be exposed to increased injuries, ecto-dermal parasites and aggressive interference competition that result from the unusual grouping behaviour. We found that, in comparison to stingrays from non-tourist sites, tourist-fed stingrays are more likely to have lower body condition, be injured by boats and predators, be susceptible to ecto-dermal parasites, and be engaged in intense interference competition (in the form of conspecific bite marks). Stingrays from tourist sites also have significantly higher mean numbers of injuries, parasites, and median bite marks. By exploring alternative hypotheses to explain the pattern of our findings (e.g. natural causes/behaviour), we unequivocally show that the impacts incurred by the stingrays stem from the effects of tourism. These findings suggest that novel grouping poses costs to the stingrays; the tourist site represents a riskier habitat with regards to injury and predation; and there may be long-term fitness consequences. From a management perspective, measures should be taken to alleviate the crowded conditions at tourist sites, in terms of both boat and stingray density. KEY WORDS: Grouping costs · Predation risk · Injury · Parasites · Aggression · Stingray · Tourism Full text in pdf format PreviousNextCite this article as: Semeniuk CAD, Rothley KD (2008) Costs of group-living for a normally solitary forager: effects of provisioning tourism on southern stingrays Dasyatis americana. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 357:271-282. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps07299 Export citation RSS - Facebook - Tweet - linkedIn Cited by Published in MEPS Vol. 357. Online publication date: April 07, 2008 Print ISSN: 0171-8630; Online ISSN: 1616-1599 Copyright © 2008 Inter-Research.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.199
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations111
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarine Ecology Progress SeriesSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207