Orb-weaving spiders show a correlated syndrome of morphology and web structure in the wild
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Extended phenotypes are traits that exist outside the physical body of organisms. Despite their role in the lives of the organisms that express them and other organisms influenced by extended phenotypes, the consistency and covariance with morphological and behavioural traits of extended phenotypes has rarely been evaluated. We repeatedly measured an extended phenotype involved in prey acquisition (web structure) of wild orb-weaving spiders (Micrathena vigorsii), which re-build their webs daily. We related web structure to behaviours and spider body length. Web diameter and web density were repeatable among individuals, reaction to a predation threat was very marginally so, and response to a prey stimulus and web evenness were not repeatable. Larger spiders spun wider webs, had webs with increased thread spacing, and the spider possibly tended to react more slowly to a predation threat. When a spider built a relatively larger web it was also a relatively less dense and less even 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. 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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".