Preface to a Special Issue: Recent Advances in Bat Research in Northwestern Canada and Alaska
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Until recently, bats were among the least studied terrestrial vertebrates in northwestern Canada and Alaska (Parker and others 1997; Jung and others 2006). Concern over the anticipated westward spread of white-nose syndrome (WNS), as well as other drivers (for example, landscape change, climate change), has resulted in a growing scientific and management interest in bats in this vast region (Blejwas and others 2014; Olson and others 2014; Wilson and others 2014), with recent studies producing interesting new findings (for example, Slough and Jung 2008; Boland and others 2009; Randall and others 2011). In particular, our knowledge of the diversity and distribution of species in northwestern Canada and Alaska has advanced significantly in recent years (see papers in this issue), and these data represent the necessary first step in baseline and environmental impact studies as well as conservation planning. Bats living at high latitudes face unique environmental conditions (such as short, bright summers), and several studies have begun to illuminate how the life history and ecology of bats in the far north are unique and where they may (or may not) differ with conspecifics at more southerly latitudes (for example, Talerico 2008; Reimer and others 2014). Unfortunately, much of the recent work has remained unpublished and unavailable to others with an interest in bats in the region. As such, our primary goal with this special issue is to bring to light recent advances in bat research in northwestern Canada and Alaska. The impetus for this special issue arose from a symposium and workshop on ‘‘Bat Ecology in Alaska: Assessing the Risk of WNS’’, organized by Karen Blejwas (Alaska Department of Fish and Game) and Link Olson (University of Alaska Museum), and held in conjunction with the Alaska Chapter of The Wildlife Society’s 2012 annual conference in Anchorage, Alaska. The symposium marked the first gathering of bat researchers from Alaska and northwestern Canada (Fig. 1) and spawned the Northern Bat Working Group (NBWG), a network of likeminded scientists and enthusiasts recognizing, and striving to address, the need for better communication and coordination among bat researchers and managers. Karen Blejwas and Miranda Terwilliger (US National Park Service) were elected the group’s first Co-Chairs. Another outcome was the notion of a special journal issue to capture some of the recent advances in our knowledge of bats in the region. The 13 papers that comprise this special issue are a combination of select presentations delivered at the 2012 symposium and others solicited from researchers we knew were producing interesting findings on bats in the region. (Our apologies to those we may have missed.) For the purpose of this special issue, our region of interest included Alaska, Yukon, Northwest Territories, and the northern portions ($546N latitude) of Alberta and British Columbia. This area spans several ecoregions, including the northern Pacific Coast and the expansive boreal forest of the interior. Much of the work presented in this issue advances our knowledge of the diversity and distribution of bats in the region. This is indicative of the expansiveness and remoteness of the region and the concomitant logistical challenges faced by bat biologists. Other works included in this special issue provide an NORTHWESTERN NATURALIST 95:173–175 WINTER 2014
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».