Swift Fox, <em>Vulpes velox</em>, Den Use Patterns in Northwestern Texas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predator avoidance may be a reason why Swift Foxes (Vulpes velox) are one of the most burrow-dependent canids in North America. Typically Swift Foxes have multiple dens, which they frequently move among. As part of a larger study to reduce Coyote (Canis latrans) related mortalities on Swift Foxes, we installed artificial escape dens in areas occupied by Swift Foxes on Rita Blanca National Grassland, Dallam County, Texas. For this paper, our objective was to determine the effects of artificial escape dens on Swift Fox den use patterns. From January 2002 to August 2004 we captured, radio-collared, and monitored 55 Swift Foxes. We documented annual number of dens used, rate of den use (fidelity), distance between dens, den area, and den sharing. We compared treated (artificial dens installed) and untreated (no artificial dens) areas but found no differences in annual number of dens (P = 0.64; mean = 8), rate of den use (P = 0.96; mean = 35%), mean distance between dens (P = 0.99; mean = 2,311 m), den area (P = 0.55; mean = 5.72 km2), or den sharing (P = 0.46; mean = 42% of time). We did not observe an effect of artificial escape dens on Swift Fox den use patterns probably because artificial escape dens were designed for temporary escape cover rather than diurnal den use.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".