Orb-web inclination in Uloboridae spiders: the role of microhabitat structure and prey capture
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
Spider webs are a good example of how phenotypic traits can be adjustable to the physical structure of the environment. Orb-web spiders of the family Uloboridae sometimes form aggregations inside webs of other spider species. In the present study, we focused on the system of Uloboridae associated with webs of the spider Aglaoctenus (Lycosidae). Because of the conformation of Aglaoctenus webs, the direction of prey flow in the central and peripheral positions of the Uloboridae aggregations is vertical and horizontal, respectively. The inclination of Uloboridae orb-webs, in relation to the ground, tends to be closer to horizontal in the centre and vertical in the periphery, whereas other characteristics of the orb-webs and spiders do not differ between the positions. Structural differences between centre and periphery were not enough to explain the inclination pattern of the orb-webs, at least regarding the method we used to measure the micro-habitat structure in this study. Our results support the view of intraspecific variability in orb-web inclination as a case of foraging optimisation strategy and, possibly, of adaptive plasticity.
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