Assessing the dispersal of spiders within agricultural fields and an adjacent mature forest
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A manipulative experiment was done in corn fields and their adjacent forests using enclosures that restricted access to ground-dwelling spiders. Enclosures were either closed from the adjacent habitat but open to ballooning and ground-dwelling spiders (using holes cut in the side of enclosures) or were open plots (controls). This allowed us to test the role of ballooning compared to cursorial dispersal of ground-dwelling spiders within these habitats. A reciprocal substrate treatment was included in which leaf-litter was added to cornfields and removed from forests to test the interaction between mode of dispersal and habitat use. Ninety species were collected using visual surveys and with pitfall traps. More species were collected in cornfields, and more individuals were collected in litter-addition plots, but we uncovered no interaction between substrate treatment and enclosure type. However, enclosures that excluded cursorial spiders had fewer mature and immature spiders, suggesting that cursorial activity (at a small spatial scale) is an important mode of dispersal within both types of habitats.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 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 it