MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965886096 · doi:10.4039/tce.2019.47

Food quality influences density-dependent fitness, but not always density-dependent habitat selection, in red flour beetles (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae)

2019· article· en· W2965886096 on OpenAlexaff
William D. Halliday, Caroline Bourque, Gabriel Blouin‐Demers

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Entomologist · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaWildlife Conservation Society CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHabitatBiologySelection (genetic algorithm)Population densityEcologyPoaceaeAgronomyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Density-dependent habitat selection models inherently rely on the negative relationship between population density and mean fitness in different habitats. Habitats differing in quality, such as different food sources or habitat structure, can have different strengths of density-dependent relationships, which can then affect patterns of density dependence in habitat selection. We tested the hypothesis that density dependence in fitness dictates the patterns in density-dependent habitat selection: individuals should prefer higher-quality habitat over lower-quality habitat. We used controlled experiments with red flour beetles (Tribolium castaneum (Herbst) (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae)) to measure density dependence of fitness and to examine density-dependent habitat selection by beetles in wheat (Triticum Linnaeus (Poaceae)), corn (Zea mays Linnaeus (Poaceae)), and soy (Glycine max (Linnaeus) Merrill (Fabaceae)) flour habitats. Despite large differences in fitness between habitats (fitness was the highest in wheat flour, lower in corn flour, and zero in soy flour), beetles showed only weak preference for wheat over corn flour and for corn over soy flour, but showed strong preference for wheat over soy flour. These preferences were the strongest at low density. This study gives insight into the relationship between habitat quality and density-dependent habitat selection in flour beetles.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian EntomologistSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207