Data from: Predator abundance drives the association between exploratory personality and foraging habitat risk in a wild marine meso-predator.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. In recent years, the incorporation of lower levels of organization to the understanding of population ecology, has led to an increase in interest for animal personality and individual foraging specialization. Despite these topics investigating comparable phenomena, i.e. individual consistency in behavior and in food resource use respectively, they have rarely been investigated together. 2. Food resource use is thought to be at the interface between personality and life-history. More explorative individuals in a population, for example, are thought to increase encounter rates with food resources and consequently have faster growth than less explorative conspecifics. 3. Such hypotheses have so far only received partial support, and the link between personality and life-history is increasingly speculated to be plastic and dependent on spatio-temporal variation in ecological conditions. Intra-specific competition and/or predation risk, for example are known to influence foraging specialization. 4. Here, we investigated the relationship between exploration personality of juvenile lemon sharks (Negaprion brevirostris) (measured in captivity) and foraging habitat use (high risk vs low risk; measured via stable isotope analysis in the field) in relation to conspecific and predator abundance. 5. We identified predator abundance as the main driver for the association between foraging habitat and exploration personality. When predators were less abundant, increased exploration was associated with foraging in riskier habitats. When predator abundance increased, an inverse relationship occurred, with less explorative individuals using more dangerous habitat. 6. We conclude that the relationship between personality and resource use is plastic and context dependent, which could explain the inconclusive results of previous studies investigating links between personality and life-history.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".