Ecological Aspects of a Wood Turtle, <em>Glyptemys insculpta</em>, Population at the Northern Limit of its Range in Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As part of a conservation research initiative, a population of Wood Turtles (Glyptemys insculpta) at the northern limit of its range was studied to ascertain characteristics of its demographics, morphometrics, density, mortality, feeding, and mating activities. Turtles were captured and marked during the activity period in 1996 and 1997. In addition, 20 individuals were radio-tracked weekly. A total of 188 turtles was captured and the size of the population in the study area was estimated at 238 turtles. The estimated population density based on this calculation is 0.44 turtles/ha. This is less than other studies indicating that population densities are greater in southern populations. Turtles from this population were large (carapace length of males=214.5 ± 4.21 mm, females=201.1 ± 10.88 mm) which supports the hypothesis that turtle size is negatively correlated with number of frost free days. The sex ratio was not significantly different from 1:1. Juvenile turtles accounted for 31.4% of the population. Observations of feeding habits support the claim that Wood Turtles are opportunistic omnivores. Of the 35 mating or courtship events observed, 77 % occurred in the fall and half of them between 11:00 and 13:00. Although limb and tail injuries and parasites were observed on many turtles, no dead turtles were observed. This last result, combined with the high rate of recruitment and even sex ratio suggests that this population is stable, making it an ideal population with which to make comparisons with other studies in areas where the species could be in decline.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".