Local predation risk shapes spatial and foraging neophobia patterns in Trinidadian guppies
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
The "dangerous niche" hypothesis posits that neophobia functions to reduce the cost of habitat use among animals exposed to unknown risks. For example, more dangerous foraging or higher competition may lead to increased spatial neophobia. Likewise, elevated ambient predation threats have been shown to induce phenotypically plastic neophobic predator avoidance. In both cases, neophobia is argued to reduce the cost of living associated with ecological uncertainty. Here, we test the hypothesis that ambient predation shapes both neophobic predator avoidance and spatial and foraging neophobia in Trinidadian guppies. Guppies were exposed to a novel foraging arena paired with a known cue (conspecific alarm cue), a novel cue (lemon odor), or a stream water control in three streams differing in ambient predation risk. We demonstrate that guppies from a high-predation-risk stream exhibited risk-averse foraging patterns regardless of the chemical stimulus presented (high spatial neophobia) and that those from a low-predation-risk stream were only risk-averse when the foraging arenas were paired with conspecific alarm cue (lower spatial neophobia). Those tested in the intermediate-predation-risk stream were consistently intermediate to the high-risk vs. low-risk populations. Our study suggests that ambient predation risk shapes both neophobic predator avoidance and space-use patterns and that neophobia may function as a "generalized" response to ecological uncertainty.
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