Community‐wide body size differences between nocturnal and diurnal insects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Examining community-wide patterns for the most diverse animal group, insects, is fundamental to our understanding of the ecological and evolutionary factors that maintain tropical diversity. Using several sampling techniques (malaise traps, pitfall traps, visual searches, and social spider nest captures), we investigated the day-night community composition of active insects to reveal differences in body size at three elevations in eastern Ecuador. We show that insects active at night are, on average, larger than those active during the day. Even though insect size decreased with increasing elevation, the observed diel pattern was consistent across elevations, and for most insect orders. All sampling techniques consistently detected day--night differences in insect size, except for social spider captures at the two higher elevations, probably due to the reduced range of colony sizes at the higher elevations and possibly lower spider activity at night. We suggest that the observed diel patterns in insect size may be driven by a combination of factors, including increased risk imposed on large insects by diurnal visual predators, mainly insectivorous birds, and physiological responses to diel changes in abiotic conditions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".