The impact of long-term continuous risk of predation on two species of gerbils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals of Gerbillus allenbyi Thomas, 1918 were subjected to artificial illumination in large field enclosures (2-ha sandy-substrate plots in the Negev Desert, Israel). The illumination was similar to that provided by a full moon and was used to mimic the elevated risk of avian predation that accompanies a full moon. We artificially illuminated the enclosures during all hours of darkness for 3 consecutive months. In some cases, we also added individuals of Gerbillus pyramidum Geoffroy, 1825 to provide a competitive challenge for the G. allenbyi. In the presence of the light source, individuals of G. allenbyi shifted their foraging activity to favor experimental areas of darkness. They also foraged less in the open and more beneath bushes. In the absence of the light source, G. allenbyi shifted its activity from the subplot with G. pyramidum to the subplot without the competitor. However, the competitive effect of the G. pyramidum disappeared in plots that were artificially illuminated. These results closely resemble those of earlier experiments during which we increased the apparent risk of predation in brief pulses lasting only 2 h/night.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".