Larval fish feeding and turbulence: A case for the downside
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Theory states that small‐scale turbulence decreases pursuit success of planktonic predators by advecting the encountered prey from the reactive zone of the predator during the pursuit event. We tested the quantitative predictions of a previously published model describing this phenomenon in larval cod by videorecording particle motion and feeding behavior of larval cod (8.7–12.3 mm) preying on copepods in a laboratory tank. Fluid motion shared characteristics with that in the ocean, i.e., intermittent, logarithmically distributed, average particle‐particle velocity difference proportional to separation distance 1/3 . Estimated bulk dissipation rates were 0–2 × 10 −8 m 2 s −3 and similar to those commonly experienced by larval cod in nature (e.g., located at 30 m during winds of ca.7 m s ‐1 ). Owing to the intermittent nature of turbulence, we related individual predation events to local, instantaneous relative velocities instead of bulk averages. Pursuit success decreased significantly with relative velocity and the observations approximated the predicted effect of turbulence on pursuit success. Nonlinear and counteracting effects of turbulence on pursuit success and encounter may partly explain the contradictory observations of how turbulence affects larval fish feeding, growth, and survival in the sea.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".