MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3093192574 · doi:10.1101/2020.10.16.342725

The predator activity landscape predicts the anti-predator behavior and distribution of prey in a tundra community

2020· preprint· en· W3093192574 on OpenAlexafffund
Jeanne Clermont, Alexis Grenier‐Potvin, Éliane Duchesne, Charline Couchoux, Frédéric Dulude‐de Broin, Andréanne Beardsell, Joël Bêty, Dominique Berteaux

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCenter for Northern StudiesUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
FundersNatural Resources CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsArcticNetParks CanadaPolar Knowledge Canada
KeywordsPredationPredatorEcologyHabitatTundraNest (protein structural motif)GeographyBiologyArctic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Predation shapes communities through consumptive and non-consumptive effects, where in the latter prey respond to perceived predation risk through risk management strategies occurring at different spatial and temporal scales. The landscape of fear concept is useful to better understand how predation risk affects prey behavioral decisions and distribution, and more generally the spatial dimension of predator-prey relationships. We assessed the effects of the predation risk landscape in a terrestrial Arctic community, where arctic fox is the main predator of ground-nesting bird species. Using high frequency GPS data, we developed a predator activity landscape resulting from fox space use patterns, and validated with an artificial prey experiment that it generated a predation risk landscape. We then investigated the effects of the fox activity landscape on multiple prey, by assessing the anti-predator behavior of a primary prey (snow goose) and the nest distribution of several incidental prey. Areas highly used by foxes were associated with a stronger level of nest defense by snow geese. We further found a lower probability of occurrence of incidental prey nests in areas highly used by foxes, but only for species nesting in habitats easily accessible to foxes. Species nesting in refuges consisting of micro-habitats limiting fox accessibility, like islets, did not respond to the fox activity landscape. Consistent with the scale of the fox activity landscape, this result reflected the capacity of refuges to allow bird nesting without regard to predation risk in the surrounding area. We demonstrated the value of using predator space use patterns to infer spatial variation in predation risk and better understand its effects on prey in landscape of fear studies. We also exposed the diversity of prey risk management strategies, hence refining our understanding of the mechanisms driving species distribution and community structure.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicWildlife Ecology and Conservation→French-language works237,207→