Den Site Activity Patterns of Adult Male and Female Swift Foxes, <em>Vulpes velox</em>, in Northwestern Texas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Activity of Swift Foxes (Vulpes velox) at den sites was studied in northwestern Texas during pup rearing seasons in 2000 and 2001 to determine role of males in parental care. Twenty-four percent of radio-collared females with a potential to breed successfully raised pups to eight weeks of age. We intensively monitored presence and absence of male and female Swift Foxes at two den sites each year. Females were present >2.6 times more at den sites than males during the pup rearing season. Female and male Swift Foxes largely stayed at dens during diurnal hours and were active away from dens during nocturnal and crepuscular hours. Females and males spent 12.4% and 3.0% more time at dens before pups emerged, than after pups emerged, respectively. Following depredation of one male parent, the female spent 29% less time at the den site. Decrease in time spent at the den by the female following loss of her mate suggested that loss of one parent might severely impact recruitment of Swift Foxes. Our observations indicated that intense Coyote (Canis latrans) depredation may severely impact pup-rearing success as well as the parental care within Swift Fox family groups.
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".