Latitudinal and seasonal variation in space use by a large, predatory reef fish,<i>Plectropomus leopardus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Temperature directly affects the metabolic rate and resource requirements of ectothermic animals, which is likely to influence their movement and habitat use. Space use is a fundamental component of an animal’s ecology, and the extent of an animal’s home range has consequences for individual distributions, community structure and ecosystem function. As ocean temperatures continue to rise as a result of global warming, determining the effects of temperature on space use and movement patterns of important fisheries species is vital. Our aim was to investigate the spatial and temporal variation in space use by a tropical fisheries species, the leopard coralgrouper (Plectropomus leopardus), from two latitudinally distinct locations on Australia’s Great Barrier Reef to determine the potential response of large‐bodied tropical fishes to ocean warming through behavioural modification. Using passive acoustic telemetry of 36 tagged individuals, we found that both core use areas (50%KUD) and home range extent (95%KUD) varied with respect to location, season, body size and temperature. Average home range extent (95%KUD) for taggedP. leoparduswas 0.32 km2at the high‐latitude location (Heron Island) compared to 0.23 km2at the low‐latitude location (Opal Reef). However, core use areas (50%KUD) did not differ significantly between the two locations. Seasonal differences were also apparent at both locations withP. leopardusshowing contraction in home range extent during the summertime. This effect was most pronounced at the low‐latitude location where home range was significantly reduced during summer when temperatures exceeded 27°C. Taken together, our findings indicate that higher ambient temperature may elicit a sustained and significant decline in space use by a commercially important reef fish. Given projected increases in ocean temperature due to global climate change, large‐bodied reef fishes may be increasingly constrained in their movement and space use, which will have ramifications for individual fitness, population viability, fisheries productivity and ecological function. A plain language 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 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".