MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1694371945 · doi:10.1139/er-2012-0042

A review of factors affecting cave climates for hibernating bats in temperate North America

2013· review· en· W1694371945 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Roger W. Perry

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCaveMicroclimateTemperate climateEcologyMast (botany)Environmental scienceKarstBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fungal pathogen Geomyces destructans, which causes white-nose syndrome in bats, thrives in the cold and moist conditions found in caves where bats hibernate. To aid managers and researchers address this disease, an updated and accessible review of cave hibernacula and cave microclimates is presented. To maximize energy savings and reduce evaporative water loss during winter, most temperate vespertilionid bats in North America select caves with temperatures between 2 and 10 °C, with 60%–100% relative humidity. Generally, the temperature in caves is similar to the mean annual surface temperature (MAST) of a region, which varies by latitude, altitude, and topography. However, MAST for most areas where caves are found in eastern North America is well above 10 °C. Thus, various factors cause cold-air infiltration that reduces temperatures of these caves during winter. These factors include depth of cave, topographic setting, airflow patterns, cave configuration, and water infiltration. Factors affecting humidity, condensation, and evaporation are also addressed. In areas where MAST is above or below the thermal requirements of Geomyces destructans, many caves used by bats as hibernacula may still provide favorable sites for optimal growth of this fungus.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations130
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ReviewsSame topicBat Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207