Body size is more important than diet in determining stable-isotope estimates of trophic position in crocodilians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The trophic position of a top predator, synonymous with food-chain length, is one of the most fundamental attributes of ecosystems. Stable isotope ratios of nitrogen (δ15N) have been used to estimate trophic position of organisms due to the predictable enrichment of15N in consumer tissues relative to their diet. Previous studies in crocodilians have found upward ontogenetic shifts in their ‘trophic position’. However, such increases are not expected from what is known about crocodilian diets because ontogenetic shifts in diet relate to taxonomic categories of prey rather than shifts to prey from higher trophic levels. When we analysed dietary information from the literature on the four Amazonian crocodilians, ontogenetic shifts in dietary-based trophic position (TPdiet) were minimal, and differed from those estimated usingδ15N data (TPSIA). Thus, ontogenetic shifts in TPSIAmay result not only from dietary assimilation but also from trophic discrimination factors (TDF orΔ15N) associated with body size. Using a unique TDF value to estimate trophic position of crocodilians of all sizes might obscure conclusions about ontogenetic shifts in trophic position. Our findings may change the way that researchers estimate trophic position of organisms that show orders of magnitude differences in size across their life span.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".