Surveys of Basking Turtles in the Rivers of Northeastern Oklahoma, with Emphasis on Graptemys geographica (Common Map Turtle)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I used binoculars and a spotting scope with a built-in digital camera to survey basking turtles at 29 sites on tributary drainages of the Arkansas River in four counties of northeastern Oklahoma and one county of southeastern Kansas. The predominant species recorded were Graptemys ouachitensis (Ouachita map turtle; 57% of all turtles) and Trachemys scripta (slider turtle; 25%), typical of results for rivers with similar assemblages of turtle species in the central United States. There were two notable results of the surveys. First, I photographed a male Graptemys geographica (common map turtle) twice at a site on the Spring River in Ottawa County; the record is only the third locality reported for the species in Oklahoma and is the first vouchered locality since the initial report of the species in Oklahoma in 1927. Prospects for finding additional localities for G. geographica in eastern Oklahoma are discussed, based on records in adjacent Kansas, Arkansas, and Missouri. Second, I observed Apalone spinifera (spiny softshell) at a higher frequency compared to basking turtle surveys that have been conducted elsewhere within its range. ©2014 Oklahoma Academy of Science
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".