MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2163811904 · doi:10.1139/z10-045

Determinants and modeling of specific dynamic action for the Common Garter Snake (Thamnophis sirtalis)

2010· article· en· W2163811904 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Scott Bessler, Mary C. Stubblefield, Gordon R. Ultsch, Stephen M. Secor

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDirectorate for Biological SciencesUniversity of AlabamaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsThamnophis sirtalisPostprandialSpecific dynamic actionBiologyMealPredationGeneralist and specialist speciesAnimal scienceZoologyEcologyEndocrinologyFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Specific dynamic action (SDA), the cumulative energy expended on digestion and assimilation, can contribute significantly to individual daily energy expenditure (DEE). The Common Garter Snake (Thamnophis sirtalis (L., 1758)) is a widely distributed generalist predator that could experience considerable variation in SDA and hence the contribution of SDA to DEE. We examined the effects of meal size, meal type, and body temperature on the postprandial metabolic response and SDA of the Eastern Garter Snake ( Thamnophis sirtalis sirtalis (L., 1758)) and generated predictive models of SDA based on meal size, body mass, and body temperature, and separately based on meal energy. Postprandial peak in oxygen consumption, duration of significantly elevated oxygen consumption, and SDA increased with increasing meal size (5%–45% of body mass). Postprandial metabolic response digesting six different equal-size prey items varied significantly; vertebrate prey generated larger SDA responses than soft-bodied invertebrates. Increases in experimental temperature (15–35 °C) yielded a matched increase in postprandial peak in oxygen consumption and decrease in digestive duration. For a 1-month hypothetical feeding history for an adult T. sirtalis, the cumulative predicted SDA varied by 4.5% among the three models (minimal, intermediate, and maximal intake of prey) and averaged 8%, 22%, and 38% of DEE, respectively.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations31
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations→French-language works237,207→