MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2973188238 · doi:10.1101/767335

Orb-weaving spiders show a correlated syndrome of morphology and web structure in the wild

2019· preprint· en· W2973188238 on OpenAlexaff
David N. Fisher, Justin Yeager, Jonathan N. Pruitt

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpiderPredationBiologyForagingFood webEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Extended phenotypes are traits that exist outside the physical body of the organism. Despite their potential role in the lives of both the organisms that express them and other organisms that can be influenced by extended phenotypes, the consistency and covariance with morphological and behaviour traits of extended phenotypes is rarely evaluated, especially in wild organisms. We repeatedly measured an extended phenotype that directly influences an organism’s prey acquisition, the web structure, of wild orb-weaving spiders ( Micrathena vigorsii ), which re-build their webs each day. We related web structure traits to behavioural traits and body size (length). Both web diameter and web density were repeatably different among individuals, while reaction to a predation threat was slightly so, but response to a prey stimulus and web symmetry were not. There was a syndrome between morphology and web structure traits, where larger spiders spun webs that were wider, had webs with increased thread spacing, and the spider tended to react more slowly to a predation threat. When a spider built a relatively larger web it was also relatively a less dense and less symmetrical web. The repeatability of web construction and relationship with spider body size we found may be common features of intra-population variation in web structure in spiders. Individual variation along the morphology and web structure syndrome could represent variation in individual foraging strategies, or age-based correlated changes. By estimating the consistency and covariances of extended phenotypes we can begin to evaluate what maintains their variation and how they might evolve.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction→French-language works237,207→