A survey of recent mammal collections in italy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<strong>Abstract</strong> A survey was designed to assess the status of the collections of recent mammals in Italy through 79 questionnaires mailed to the main University institutions, municipal, provincial or regional museums and other institutions (including some private collections). We received 58 questionnaires (return rate of 73%). The minimum number of specimens in recent mammal collections in Italy is 161,268 (70% are in Italian collections and 30% in exotic ones). Most of these specimens are concentrated in a quarter of the collections. Taxidermy is the main preservation technique, above all in exotic collections (84%). 82% of the exotic collections date back to the 19th century, while specimens collected after 1950 form 91% of the Italian ones. During the 20th century the Italian collections progressively increased in number and spread through the peninsula and in Sicily. Insectivora, Rodentia, Carnivora, Lagomorpha, Artiodactyla and Primates are represented in more than 80% of the collections. Research results the primary goal both in Italian (70%) and exotic (57%) collections.<br> <br> Appendix<br> This paper contains an appendix, <em>available in electronic format only</em>.<br> <a href="http://www.italian-journal-of-mammalogy.it/include/getdoc.php?id=1053&public=true">Click here</a> to download supplementary files.<br> <strong>Riassunto</strong> <strong>Le collezioni di mammiferi attuali in Italia.</strong> Per delineare lo status delle collezioni museali di mammiferi attuali in Italia è stata condotta un’indagine mediante 79 questionari inviati a istituzioni universitarie, musei civici, provinciali e regionali ed altre istituzioni (comprese alcune collezioni private). Abbiamo ricevuto 58 questionari (73%). In Italia il numero minimo di esemplari di mammiferi attuali presenti nelle collezioni è risultato 161.268 (il 70% in collezioni italiane, il rimanente 30% in collezioni esotiche). La maggior parte degli esemplari è concentrata in un quarto del totale delle collezioni indagate. La tassidermia costituisce la principale tecnica di conservazione, soprattutto nelle collezioni esotiche (84%). L’82% delle collezioni esotiche risale al XIX secolo, gli esemplari raccolti dopo il 1950 formano, invece, il 91% delle collezioni italiane. Durante il XX secolo le collezioni italiane hanno mostrato un progressivo incremento numerico insieme ad una crescente diffusione su gran parte del territorio nazionale ed in Sicilia. Insectivora, Rodentia, Carnivora, Lagomorpha, Artiodactyla e Primates si trovano in più dell’80% delle collezioni. La ricerca risulta la principale destinazione di uso sia per le collezioni italiane (70%) sia per le esotiche (57%).<br> <br> Appendice<br> Questo lavoro contiene un'Appendice, <em>disponibilie esclusivamente in formato elettronico</em>.<br> <a href="http://www.italian-journal-of-mammalogy.it/include/getdoc.php?id=1053&public=true">Clicca qui</a> per scaricare l'Appendice.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.086 | 0.001 |
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".