MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924980182 · doi:10.7717/peerj.6556

Effects of handling and short-term captivity: a multi-behaviour approach using red sea urchins, <i>Mesocentrotus franciscanus</i>

2019· article· en· W2924980182 on OpenAlexaff
Aneesh P. H. Bose, Daniel Zayonc, Nikolaos Avrantinis, Natasha Ficzycz, Jonathan Fischer‐Rush, Fiona T. Francis, Siobhan Gray, Faye Manning, Haley Robb, Coralee Schmidt, Christine Spice, Aari Umedaly, Jeff Warden, Isabelle M. Côté

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityBamfield Marine Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCaptivityBiologyPredationZoologyWrasseFisheryBoldnessEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>Psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the effects of captivity-induced stress on wild-caught animals after their release back into the wild is critical for the long-term success of relocation and reintroduction programs. To date, most of the research on captivity stress has focused on vertebrates, with far less attention paid to invertebrates. Here, we examine the effect of short-term captivity (i.e., up to four days) on self-righting, aggregation, and predator-escape behaviours in wild-caught red sea urchins, Mesocentrotus franciscanus , after their release back into the wild. Aggregation behaviour, which has been linked to feeding in sea urchins, was not affected by handling or captivity. In contrast, the sea urchins that had been handled and released immediately, as well as those that were handled and held captive, took longer to right themselves and were poorer at fleeing from predators than wild, unhandled sea urchins. These results indicate that handling rather than captivity impaired these behaviours in the short term. The duration of captivity did not influence the sea urchin behaviours examined. Longer-term monitoring is needed to establish what the fitness consequences of these short-term behavioural changes might be. Our study nevertheless highlights the importance of considering a suite of responses when examining the effects of capture and captivity. Our findings, which are based on a locally abundant species, can inform translocation efforts aimed at bolstering populations of ecologically similar but depleted invertebrate species to retain or restore important ecosystem functions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations17
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207