The influence of food quality and availability on trophic position, carbon signature, and growth rate of an omnivorous crayfish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fourteen sites in 13 streams were surveyed to address the importance of food quality and quantity on trophic position, carbon signature, and growth rate of noble crayfish ( Astacus astacus ) by combining the analyses of gut content, stable isotopes, and RNA–DNA ratio. The gut content analysis showed an omnivorous feeding habit, but total animal food sources contributed more to the nitrogen and carbon isotope signals of this species. The biomass of invertebrates (i.e., high quality food) influenced the trophic position, carbon signature, and growth rate. Our results show that crayfish in streams with a high biomass of invertebrates were at a higher trophic position and had a higher growth rate than crayfish in streams with a low biomass of invertebrates. A high biomass of relatively sedentary invertebrates indicates a habitat with high algae biomass, which is reflected in the more autochthonous carbon signature of crayfish. Further, noble crayfish in temperate streams seem to have dual functional roles by acting as predator and as shredder by processing large amounts of detritus.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".