Diet flexibility in three harvester ants (<i>Pogonomyrmex</i> spp.): effects of grazing and natural variations in the availability of seeds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study of diet and its relationship with available resources allows us to evaluate how species that differ in their degree of ecological flexibility respond to natural and anthropogenic variations that affect food availability. In the central Monte desert, extensive cattle ranching reduces the abundance of grass seeds, the most consumed and preferred food by the harvester ants Pogonomyrmex inermis Forel, 1914, Pogonomyrmex mendozanus (Cuezzo & Claver, 2009), and Pogonomyrmex propinqua (Johnson, 2021). We studied the diet of these species in grazed and ungrazed habitats over 4 years, including a period during which the abundance of grass seeds naturally decreased. We expected that ants would modify their diet in grazed sites and that the response would be different among species depending on their ecological flexibility. The three species presented a mainly granivorous diet in both grazing conditions and during the 4 years, but showed differences in the breadth of their diet. Pogonomyrmex inermis and Pogonomyrmex propinqua always had a narrow diet that consisted mainly of grass seeds, while Pogonomyrmex mendozanus modified its diet to include higher proportions of shrub seeds and other items when the abundance of grass seed decreased. In a scenario of scarce resources, this flexibility could represent an advantage over a more strict graminivorous diet.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".