Too important to tamper with: predation risk affects body mass and escape behaviour but not escape ability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Escaping from a predator is a matter of life or death, and prey are expected to adaptively alter their physiology under chronic predation risk in ways that may affect escape. Theoretical models assume that escape performance is mass dependent, whereby scared prey strategically maintain an optimal body mass to enhance escape. Experiments testing the mass‐dependent predation risk hypothesis have demonstrated that prior experience of predation risk can affect body mass, and the behavioural decisions about evasive actions to take. Other studies on natural changes in body mass indicate that mass can affect escape. No single experiment has tested if all of these components are indeed linked, which is a critical necessary condition underpinning the mass‐dependent predation risk hypothesis. We tested all components of the mass‐dependent predation risk hypothesis in a repeated measures experiment by presenting predator and non‐predator cues to brown‐headed cowbirds housed in semi‐natural conditions. Exposure to predator cues affected body mass, fat, pectoral muscle thickness and evasive actions (take‐off angle and speed), but not the physiological capacity to escape, as measured by flying ability. Examining individual variation revealed that flying ability was unrelated to mass loss in either sex, unrelated to mass gain in males, and only females that gained a very large amount of mass flew poorly. We next conducted a body mass manipulation in the laboratory to rigorously test whether small to large perturbations in mass can ever affect flying ability. We induced either no change in mass (control), a moderate reduction of <10% or a more extreme reduction of >10% which the literature suggests should enhance flight. Flying ability was maintained regardless of treatment. Examining individual variation revealed the same precise patterns as in the first experiment. We conclude that prey may alter their mass and evasive actions in response to predation risk, but their escape ability remains robust and inelastic, presumably because disabling oneself is likely to lead to disastrous consequences. We suggest that animals may only face a mass‐dependent predation risk trade‐off in a narrow set of circumstances linked to life‐history stages that require large amounts of mass gain , for example, parturition and migration. A lay summary is available for this article.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".