MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2515480940 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2016-0231

Unpalatable, yet unprotected: trout reduce survival and development rate of rare toad tadpoles despite chemical defense

2016· article· en· W2515480940 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wendy E. Lanier, Kevin R. Bestgen, W. Chris Funk, Larissa L. Bailey

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTadpole (physics)PredationBiologyMetamorphosisPredatorAmphibianLarvaEcologyOncorhynchusTroutToadZoologyFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unpalatable prey species often have toxins that protect from direct consumption. However, negative effects of prey manipulation by predators are rarely considered and may understate impacts to unpalatable species. When both prey and predator are species of concern, stronger understanding of the predator–prey relationship is warranted. We explored direct and indirect effects of greenback cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii stomias) on boreal toad (Anaxyrus boreas boreas) tadpole survival, growth, and development, as well as postmetamorphosis survival and growth. We found exposure to O. clarkii stomias delayed metamorphosis by 1–2.5 days and reduced tadpole survival by up to 25%, even though only a single tadpole was consumed. Tadpoles from captive-bred eggs had lower survival, growth, and greater loss in body condition after metamorphosis compared with tadpoles from wild eggs. We found that O. clarkii stomias do not innately avoid A. boreas boreas but instead strike tadpoles to determine prey palatability and repeated gustation likely reduced survival. Our results shed light on unresolved issues with A. boreas boreas captive breeding and demonstrate the nonconsumptive negative impacts of predators.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.208
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicAmphibian and Reptile BiologyFrench-language works237,207