Interpopulation variation in predator avoidance behavior of a freshwater snail to the same predator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The New Zealand mud snail ( Potamopyrgus antipodarum (J.E. Grey, 1843)) responds to the presence of predatory fish by moving to a safer environment. These experiments attempted to determine if predator detection by the snail results in specific responses to light and (or) gravity by the snail and if snails respond more or less to fish from their native lake compared with fish from a foreign lake. Snails and fish (Gobiomorphus cotidianus McDowall, 1975) were collected from lakes Alexandrina and Peorua from the South Island of New Zealand. Snails were placed in behavioral chambers and tested for their responses to the direction of light, vertical orientation with respect to gravity, and rate of movement in light and dark conditions. Snails from each lake were exposed to one of three treatments: plain water, water from fish from Lake Alexandrina, and water from fish from Lake Peorua. Results showed no effect of direction of light on behavior. Snails from Lake Alexandrina were not found to alter their up or down movements in response to the detection of fish. However, snails from Lake Peorua moved down more in response to fish from their own lake than fish from Lake Alexandrina or no fish. Both snail populations increase their speed in the light more when detecting Alexandrina fish compared with Peorua fish and no fish. Both snail populations show some evidence of enhanced response to local predator populations. Interestingly, different behavioral mechanisms appear to be responsible for the avoidance behaviors in each population.
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 | 0.001 | 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".