MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1499823936 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v117i3.745

Den Site Activity Patterns of Adult Male and Female Swift Foxes, <em>Vulpes velox</em>, in Northwestern Texas

2003· article· en· W1499823936 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Patrick R. Lemons, Warren B. Ballard, Robert M. Sullivan, Marsha A. Sovada

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTexas Tech UniversityTexas Parks and Wildlife Department
KeywordsVulpesCanisNocturnalAdult maleBiologyCrepuscularPaternal careZoologyEcologyPredationEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations7
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207