Threats from the air: Damselfly predation on diverse prey taxa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To understand the diversity and strength of predation in natural communities, researchers must quantify the total amount of prey species in the diet of predators. Metabarcoding approaches have allowed widespread characterization of predator diets with high taxonomic resolution. To determine the wider impacts of predators, researchers should combine DNA techniques with estimates of population size of predators using mark-release-recapture (MRR) methods, and with accurate metrics of food consumption by individuals. Herein, we estimate the scale of predation exerted by four damselfly species on diverse prey taxa within a well-defined 12-ha study area, resolving the prey species of individual damselflies, to what extent the diets of predatory species overlap, and which fraction of the main prey populations are consumed. We identify the taxonomic composition of diets using DNA metabarcoding and quantify damselfly population sizes by MRR. We also use predator-specific estimates of consumption rates, and independent data on prey emergence rates to estimate the collective predation pressure summed over all prey taxa and specific to their main prey (non-biting midges or chironomids) of the four damselfly species. The four damselfly species collectively consumed a prey mass equivalent to roughly 870 (95% CL 410-1,800) g, over 2 months. Each individual consumed 29%-66% (95% CL 9.4-123) of its body weight during its relatively short life span (2.1-4.7 days; 95% CL 0.74-7.9) in the focal population. This predation pressure was widely distributed across the local invertebrate prey community, including 4 classes, 19 orders and c. 140 genera. Different predator species showed extensive overlap in diets, with an average of 30% of prey shared by at least two predator species. Of the available prey individuals in the widely consumed family Chironomidae, only a relatively small proportion (0.76%; 95% CL 0.35%-1.61%) were consumed. Our synthesis of population sizes, per-capita consumption rates and taxonomic distribution of diets identifies damselflies as a comparatively minor predator group of aerial insects. As the next step, we should add estimates of predation by larger odonate species, and experimental removal of odonates, thereby establishing the full impact of odonate predation on prey communities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".