Diet and isotopic niche of eastern sand darter (<i>Ammocrypta pellucida</i>) near the northern edge of its range: a test of niche specificity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Niche specificity can predispose species to population declines during periods of resource limitation, yet trophic niche specificity is poorly known for many small-bodied freshwater fishes. Applying a two-tiered approach involving stomach content and stable isotope analyses, we examined the diet and trophic niche of the threatened eastern sand darter (Ammocrypta pellucida (Putnam, 1863)) and co-occurring fishes in the Thames River, Ontario, Canada. As with previous studies, stomach content analysis revealed that eastern sand darter consumed a variety of benthic organisms including Chironomidae, Cladocera, Ostracoda, Oligochaeta, and Ephemeroptera; however, proportional contributions of prey groups differed based on stable isotope analysis, highlighting the potential for seasonal variation in prey consumption. Despite evidence of a generalist strategy, stable isotope analysis indicated eastern sand darter exhibited a relatively narrow trophic niche relative to co-occurring fishes. Trophic niche overlap was relatively minor between eastern sand darter and drift-feeding fishes (spotfin shiner (Cyprinella spiloptera (Cope, 1867)), emerald shiner (Notropis atherinoides Rafinesque, 1818), and buffalo sp. (genus Ictiobus Rafinesque, 1820)), but was more evident between eastern sand darter and benthic and benthopelagic fishes (johnny darter (Etheostoma nigrum Rafinesque, 1820) and blackside darter (Percina maculata (Girard, 1859))), indicating that competition with these species may be more likely during periods of prey scarcity.
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 | 0.001 | 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".