MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Local and landscape habitat determinants of water vole distribution in a patchy Mediterranean environment

2002· article· en· W1021228963 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
José M. Fedriani, Miguel Delibes, Pablo Ferreras, Jacinto Román

Bibliographic record

VenueEcoscience · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetapopulationEcologyVoleHabitatPopulationNational parkGeographyMediterranean climateBiologyBiological dispersal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We studied the distribution of a water-dependent species (southern water vole, Arvicola sapidus) in a Mediterranean region (Doñana National Park, southwest Spain) characterized by a complex array of different-sized ponds (where voles were confined) embedded in a mostly unsuitable landscape. For each surveyed pond (n = 185), a total of 26 variables related to both local (20) and landscape (6) attributes were quantified, and the presence of voles was evaluated by finding their typical signs (latrines). We found signs of water voles in 60% of ponds, despite the fact that most of them (84%) were totally dried out. A generalized linear model analysis showed that water voles were sensitive to both local and landscape attributes of ponds. At a landscape scale, presence of voles was more likely in ponds located outside the national park, close to other ponds holding voles, and far away from areas rich in potential predators and competitors. At a local scale, ponds with water voles were characterized by abundant grasses, banks well covered by brushes, low altitude, and low abundance of rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). We also studied the use of microhabitat by voles within four specific ponds and found that they preferred plots of higher vegetation cover; thus, there was consistency in some cues used by water voles at the population/subpopulation scale (among different ponds) and at the behavioral scale (within ponds). Our study strongly supports the notion that the entire vole population is structured in distinct subpopulations, which are affected by a hierarchy of processes ranging from metapopulation dynamics and influenced by the landscape within which ponds are embedded as well as the local habitat quality.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 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

Citations40
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcoscienceSame topicAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207