Landscapes of fear and safety: the integration of two different sensory landscapes determines behavioral responses in the crayfish <i>Faxonius rusticus</i> and is mediated by chemical cues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research into predator–prey interactions has focused on the landscape of fear and nonconsumptive effects that result from prey responses. Prey behavior is influenced by predator presence and the location and quality of foraging resources in habitats. These areas have been fruitful, but the role of prey refuges has lagged. We investigated how refuge spatial distribution and quality influence prey behavior. To determine the role of the landscape of safety (LOS) in prey decision-making, we altered spatial relationships between refuges, refuge quality, and predation threats in mesocosms. Mesocosms were constructed such that prey only received predatory chemical cues. We employed a behavioral assay including largemouth bass ( Micropterus salmoides (Lacepède, 1802): predator) and virile crayfish ( Faxonius rusticus (Girard, 1852): prey). Crayfish shelter use was significantly influenced by quality and spatial relationship of shelters to predatory threats, and the interaction of these two factors. Particularly, crayfish used high-quality shelters more often when located closer to predatory cues than farther away and did not use low-quality shelters more than controls. High-quality shelter usage decreased as threat level (measured by gape ratio) decreased. These results support the idea that prey utilize an LOS, and information contained in these two landscapes may alter behavioral decisions.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".