MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951140941 · doi:10.3354/meps12194

Predator-induced shell plasticity in mussels hinders predation by drilling snails

2017· article· en· W2951140941 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
ZT Sherker, JA Ellrich, Ricardo A. Scrosati

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine Ecology Progress Series · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMusselPredationWhelkIntertidal zonePredatorBiologyEcologyGastropodaForagingFisheryZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MEPS Marine Ecology Progress Series Contact the journal Facebook Twitter RSS Mailing List Subscribe to our mailing list via Mailchimp HomeLatest VolumeAbout the JournalEditorsTheme Sections MEPS 573:167-175 (2017) - DOI: https://doi.org/10.3354/meps12194 Predator-induced shell plasticity in mussels hinders predation by drilling snails Zachary T. Sherker, Julius A. Ellrich, Ricardo A. Scrosati* Department of Biology, St. Francis Xavier University, 2320 Notre Dame Avenue, Antigonish, Nova Scotia B2G 2W5, Canada *Corresponding author: rscrosat@stfx.ca ABSTRACT: Sessile invertebrate prey that detect waterborne predator cues often respond by strengthening their structural defenses. Experimental evidence of the functional significance of such modifications using field-raised organisms is lacking. This study addresses that gap using intertidal mussels and predatory dogwhelks from Atlantic Canada. During the spring and summer of 2016, we ran a field experiment that manipulated dogwhelk presence to test their nonconsumptive effects on mussel traits. Dogwhelk cues elicited thickening at the lip, centre, and base of mussel shells while simultaneously limiting shell growth in length. As shell mass was unaffected by dogwhelk presence, a trade-off between shell thickening and elongation was revealed. Thickening was most pronounced at the thinnest parts of the shell. Using the field-raised organisms, a lab experiment found that dogwhelks took, on average, 55% longer to drill and consume mussels previously exposed to dogwhelk cues than mussels grown without such a cue exposure. Dogwhelks drilled at the thinnest parts of the shell, but, nonetheless, the consumed cue-exposed mussels had thicker shells at the borehole than the consumed mussels not previously exposed to cues, which likely explains the observed difference in handling time. As handling time normally decreases predation success, this study indicates that the plastic structural modifications in mussels triggered by dogwhelk cues in the field hinder predation by these drilling predators. KEY WORDS: Dogwhelk · Intertidal · Mussel · Mytilus edulis · Mytilus trossulus · Nonconsumptive predator effect · Nucella lapillus · Phenotypic plasticity · Predation risk Full text in pdf format PreviousNextCite this article as: Sherker ZT, Ellrich JA, Scrosati RA (2017) Predator-induced shell plasticity in mussels hinders predation by drilling snails. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 573:167-175. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps12194 Export citation RSS - Facebook - Tweet - linkedIn Cited by Published in MEPS Vol. 573. Online publication date: June 21, 2017 Print ISSN: 0171-8630; Online ISSN: 1616-1599 Copyright © 2017 Inter-Research.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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.

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

Citations49
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarine Ecology Progress SeriesSame topicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207