Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39555389›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2024

Prey detection by a stepwise visual template matching mechanism.

Jules Silverman, Brad W Taylor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jules SilvermanDepartment of Entomology and Plant Pathology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA.
Brad W TaylorDepartment of Applied Ecology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7824-2304

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Predators can improve prey capture using a search image, and recent prey provide a visual template with which subsequent prey are compared. Considering trout feeding responses to mayfly prey of different sizes and phenological availability across years, we tested if changing relative abundances (ratios) of prey of the same species, but different body sizes, shifted trout feeding behaviour. For example, we hypothesized that a feeding switch from larger to smaller prey required continuous exposure to the novel smaller prey. The hypothesis that continuous exposure to novel small prey results in their acceptance was not supported. Rather, we discovered that trout identify novel prey using a dynamic stepwise visual neural template prey matching process, which involves the formation of focal prey template based on size or type, rejection of novel prey that do not match the size or type templates and modification of the existing or development of multiple prey templates that eventually enabled recognition of novel, small prey. We also discovered trout store multiple visual prey templates in memory. These results have implications for predator and prey dynamics, optimal foraging, the persistence of rare prey, prey species coexistence and predator selection on prey phenology.

Indexed as

emergenceforaging theoryprey recognitionprey sizeprey switchingsearch image

Identifiers

PMID39555389
PMCPMC11569828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.