The effect of predator kairomones on caudal regeneration by Allegheny Mountain Dusky Salamanders (<i>Desmognathus ochrophaeus</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many prey use autotomy as an antipredator mechanism. Rapid regeneration of autotomized appendages is beneficial because forfeited tissues may serve as organs for energy storage, accessories for locomotion, or indicators of social status. We monitored levels of caudal regeneration by Allegheny Mountain Dusky Salamanders (Desmognathus ochrophaeus Cope, 1859) exposed to kairomones from predatory Eastern Garter Snakes (Thamnophis sirtalis (Linnaeus, 1758)). After the induction of autotomy, salamanders were exposed to one of three treatment regimens: blank (water), or acute (30 min per week) or chronic (constant) exposure to predator kairomones during a 12-week study period. Overall, the mean volume of regenerated tissue, as a percentage of the original tail volume, was highest for individuals exposed to the blank versus predator kairomones. When the combined effects of time elapsed since the induction of caudal autotomy and the different treatment regimens were considered, we found that the mean volume of regenerated tissue was significantly greater for control salamanders beginning 8 weeks after autotomy. The mechanism contributing to the differential rates of regeneration among individuals in our treatment groups is unknown, but previous work suggests that elevated stress related to predation threat can have detrimental effects on wound healing and growth in amphibians.
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".