Population Dynamics of Deer Mice, <em>Peromyscus maniculatus</em>, and Yellow-pine Chipmunks, <em>Tamias amoenus</em>, in Old Field and Orchard Habitats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are often several rodent species included in the small mammal communities in orchard agro-ecosystems. This study was designed to test the hypothesis that the population levels of Deer Mice (Peromyscus maniculatus) and Yellow-pine Chipmunks (Tamias amoenus) would be enhanced in old field compared with orchard habitats. Rodent populations were intensively livetrapped in replicate old field and orchard sites over a four-year period at Summerland, British Columbia, Canada. Deer Mouse populations were, on average, significantly higher (2.5 – 3.4 times) in the old field than orchard sites in summer and winter periods. Mean numbers/ha of Deer Mice ranged from 12.1 to 60.4 in old field sites and from 3.3 to 19.9 in orchard sites. Breeding seasons in orchards were significantly longer than those in old field sites, in terms of proportion of reproductive male Deer Mice. Recruitment of new animals and early juvenile survival of Deer Mice were similar in orchard and old field sites. Populations of Yellow-pine Chipmunks ranged in mean abundance/ha from 5.6 – 19.0 in old field sites and from 1.9 – 17.5 on one orchard site, with no difference in mean abundance in 2 of 4 years of the study. Recruitment and mean survival of Yellow-pine Chipmunks also followed this pattern. This study is the first detailed comparison of the population dynamics of these rodent species in old field and orchard habitats. These species should be able to maintain their population levels and help contribute to a diversity of small mammals in this agrarian landscape.
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 | 0.001 | 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".