Escape behavior of Side-blotched Lizards (<i>Uta</i> <i>stansburiana</i>) in response to model predators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Few field studies have tested for geographic variation in escape behavior and even fewer have examined responses of prey to multiple predators despite most prey occurring in multipredator environments. We performed 458 escape trials on Side-blotched Lizards (Uta stansburiana Baird and Girard, 1852) from 10 populations that differed in predator abundances. We quantified escape behavior of Side-blotched Lizards when approached with one of two model predators: a lizard (Great Basin Collared Lizard (Crotaphytus bicinctores N.M. Smith and Tanner, 1972)) or a snake (Western Yellow-bellied Racer (Coluber mormon Baird and Girard, 1852)). Our results suggest that the escape responses of Side-blotched Lizards (flight initiation distance, distance fled, refuge entry) do not differ when approached by either a model predatory lizard or a model predatory snake. Nor do the escape responses of individual Side-blotched Lizards differ in relation to the abundances of predatory lizards or snakes in the local environment. Rather, only the directness of fleeing toward a refuge differed based on model predator type with Side-blotched Lizards fleeing more directly toward a refuge in response to a model lizard. These findings suggest that Side-blotched Lizards tend to use a more generalized escape response to approaching 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".