MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2936241565 · doi:10.1093/aesa/saz021

Co-occurring Notonecta (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Notonectidae) Species Differ in Their Behavioral Response to Cues of Belostoma (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Belostomatidae) Predation Risk

2019· article· en· W2936241565 on OpenAlexafffund
Ilia Maria C. Ferzoco, Celina B. Baines, Shannon J. McCauley

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the Entomological Society of America · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto MississaugaUniversities Space Research Association
KeywordsBiologyPredationHeteropteraGeneralist and specialist speciesPredatorEcologyHemipteraIntraguild predationHabitatZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Predators affect prey through direct consumption as well as by inducing prey to defensively alter their phenotypes, including behavioral phenotypes, to maximize survival under predation risk. Closely related sympatric prey species with shared natural enemies may resolve behavioral trade-offs under predation risk differently. In a laboratory experiment, we investigated two co-occurring semiaquatic backswimmer congeners, which exhibit differences in their degree of habitat specialization across a gradient of habitat permanence. Notonecta irrorata Uhler primarily occur in ephemeral ponds, whereas Notonecta undulata Say are habitat generalists that are commonly found in both permanent and ephemeral ponds. We tested whether the two species differed in antipredator responses to both visual and chemical cues of a shared predator, the giant water bug, in a fully factorial design. The generalist species, N. undulata, exhibited reductions in activity in the presence of predator chemical cues only, whereas the specialist species, N. irrorata, remained consistently active across predator cue treatments. Our work shows that there are species-specific differences in how prey assess or respond to predation risk. The varying propensities of these backswimmer congeners to behaviorally respond to a shared predator, and differences in their behavior when exposed to different predation risk cues may be linked to underlying divergence in their life-history strategies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the Entomological Society of AmericaSame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207