MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2176679483 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2012-0310

Plasticity of shell preference and its antipredatory advantages in the hermit crab<i>Calcinus</i><i>californiensis</i>

2013· article· en· W2176679483 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elsah Arce, Guillermina Alcaraz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHermit crabBiologyPredatorPredationDecapodaAnomuraPreferenceZoologyEcologyCrustaceanStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207