MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401661446 · doi:10.1093/beheco/arae063

Predation risk elicits a negative relationship between boldness and growth in <i>Helisoma</i> snails

2024· article· en· W4401661446 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin J. Toscano, Hassen Allegue, Daniel Bauloye, Marta Drausnik, Peyton Orloff

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Ecology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoldnessSnailBiologyPredationEcologyFreshwater snailCrayfishGastropodaContext (archaeology)PredatorZoologyPersonalitySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The relationship between risk-prone behavior and growth is central to tradeoff models that explain the existence and maintenance of among-individual variation in behavior (i.e. animal personality). These models posit positive relationships between among-individual variation in risk-prone behaviors and growth, yet how the strength and direction of such relationships depend on ecological conditions is unclear. We tested how different levels of predation risk from crayfish (Faxonius limosus) mediate the association between among-individual variation in snail (Helisoma trivolvis) boldness (emergence time) and growth in shell size. We found that crayfish predation risk reduced snail growth but that the effect of snail boldness on individual growth was context-dependent—snail boldness was unrelated to growth in the absence of risk and under high risk, but shy snails grew faster than bold snails under low predation risk. Other traits (snail size, body condition, and intrinsic growth rate measured under ad libitum food conditions) failed to explain snail growth variation under any risk level. Though opposite to the prediction of tradeoff models, enhanced growth of shy snails could function as a predator defense mechanism that protects their prospects for future reproduction consistent with the underlying premise of tradeoff models. Thus, our results highlight the importance of accounting for ecological conditions in understanding behavior–life history associations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral EcologySame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207