MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2594189995 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2016-0133

Dehydration resistance and tolerance in the brush-legged wolf spider (<i>Schizocosa</i> <i>ocreata</i>): a comparison of survivorship, critical body water content, and water-loss rates between sexes

2017· article· en· W2594189995 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Samantha Kelly Herrmann, Jessica Roberts

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOhio State University
KeywordsBiologySurvivorship curveEcologyDehydrationMicroclimateZoologyThermoregulationHumidity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Small-bodied terrestrial animals like spiders face challenges maintaining water reserves essential for homeostasis. They may experience dry microclimates and (or) seasonal variation in water availability, so dehydration is a common stressor that may help explain movement, foraging, and other behaviors. This study examines aspects of dehydration resistance and tolerance in the brush-legged wolf spider, Schizocosa ocreata (Hentz, 1844) (Araneae: Lycosidae), commonly found in the leaf litter of eastern deciduous forests of North America. Sexes differ in morphology, physiology, reproductive strategy, and life history, likely resulting in divergent abilities to resist and tolerate dehydration. We used humidity-controlled chambers to examine relative survivorship by sex under varying humidity regimes, water-loss rates, body water content, and critical water mass. Spiders survived significantly longer in higher humidity regimes (≥50% RH). Females had significantly better survivorship overall, lower body-loss rates, and lower critical mass, though males had greater percent body water content, indicating that females have greater dehydration resistance and tolerance than males. Although sex-based differences in survival time and water-loss rates are likely an effect of relative body mass, females should be more successful than males during periods of episodic drought and are likely selected to survive later in the season while caring for offspring.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction→French-language works237,207→