Plasticity of shell preference and its antipredatory advantages in the hermit crab<i>Calcinus</i><i>californiensis</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The preference of the hermit crab Calcinus californiensis Bouvier, 1898 among six shell species and different shell sizes was evaluated in the presence of the swimming crab Arenaeus mexicanus (Gerstaecker, 1856), a natural predator of this species. In a second experiment, the survival benefit of the shell choice made under predation threat was examined by exposing hermit crabs occupying three different shell species (including the most and least preferred shells of two fits) to a free swimming crab predator. The preference for shell species was similar in the absence and presence of the predator threat, although the hermit crabs choose larger shells (loose) when exposed to the predator compared with the ones chosen in its absence. The predatory experiment showed a higher survival chance for the hermit crabs occupying loose shells of the preferred shell species (Cantharus sanguinolentus (Duclos, 1833)). The results of this study show that the hermit crab C. californiensis is able to change their preference for shell size in response to a predation threat and that the change in preference confers survival benefits for hermit crabs. This study is consistent with the assumption that predation is an important selective pressure for intertidal hermit crabs.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".