Flight initiation distance is differentially sensitive to the costs of staying and leaving food patches in a small-mammal prey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Escape theory predicts that a prey should flee from an approaching predator at a point in which the cost of staying equals the cost of escape. We manipulated the cost of fleeing upon approaching human predators by providing the small mammal Octodon degus (Molina, 1782) with varying amounts of supplementary food likely to disappear while the animals are not in the food patch (e.g., hidden in their burrows). Simultaneously, we manipulated the risk of remaining in the patch by providing supplementary food at varying distances from the nearest burrow. Degus fled at a shorter distance to approaching predators when foraging in patches closer to the nearest burrow and supplied with relatively high abundance of food, but only when these rodents were foraging socially. Also, degus fled at a greater distance to approaching predators when foraging in patches far from the nearest burrow. Thus, functions linked to the loss of feeding opportunities and the risk of predation interact to influence flight initiation distance after a simulated attack. This study represented one of the few demonstrations of an interactive effect between cost and risks on antipredator behavior in a small, social prey mammal.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".