MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416375029 · doi:10.1139/er-2025-0150

Navigating the landscape of fear and disgust: trade-offs between predation, infection, and foraging

2025· article· en· W4416375029 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
I.M.A. Heitkönig, Joel S. Brown, Robert D. Holt, Frank van Langevelde, Anouschka R. Hof

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPsychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredationForagingDisgustResource (disambiguation)PredatorOptimal foraging theoryAdaptive strategies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By living in a landscape of fear, prey species modify their spatial distribution, behaviour, and diet to reduce predation risk, while often compromising food intake. These non-lethal effects often outweigh the lethal effects of predation on prey species. Parasites can have similar effects on their animal hosts, so hosts need to trade-off e.g., resource usage and infection risk in a landscape of disgust. Given these similarities between prey–predator systems and host–parasite systems, we review recent insights from the concepts of the landscape of fear and disgust (combined in a landscape of peril) and suggest novel applications and testable hypotheses for disease ecology. The adaptive behaviours of hosts to avoid parasite infection leads to new predictions for how parasites and predators influence the distribution, behaviour, and food intake of animals.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ReviewsSame topicPsychology of Moral and Emotional JudgmentFrench-language works237,207