MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985488366 · doi:10.1139/z00-181

Body size, sexual dimorphism, and seasonal mass fluctuations in a larger sika deer subspecies, the Hokkaido sika deer (<i>Cervus nippon yesoensis</i> Heude, 1884)

2001· article· en· W1985488366 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Masatsugu Suzuki, Manabu Onuma, Mayumi Yokoyama, Koich Kaji, Masami Yamanaka, Noriyuki Ohtaishi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHokkaido UniversityObihiro University of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine
KeywordsSexual dimorphismCervusBiologySubspeciesCervus elaphusFoot (prosody)AnatomyAnimal scienceZoologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measurements of shoulder height, body length, hind-foot length, and total body mass were collected from 309 Hokkaido sika deer (Cervus nippon yesoensis Heude, 1884) (115 males and 194 females) and analyzed statistically for sexual dimorphism and seasonal body mass fluctuations. The von Bertalanffy equation was fitted to the growth curves that resulted. Asymptotic shoulder height, body length, and hind-foot length were 106.2, 112.6, and 52.9 cm in males and 94.8, 103.9, and 49.4 cm in females, respectively. Total body mass showed distinct seasonal fluctuations, ranging between 102.8 and 151.0 kg in adult males and 68.0 and 99.8 kg in adult females. Male/female ratios in shoulder height, body length, hind-foot length, and total mass were 1.12, 1.08, 1.07, and 1.51, respectively. These results indicate that the Hokkaido sika deer is one of the largest subspecies, at least in skeleton size. A larger body and longer hind foot would seem to be evolutionary adaptations to Hokkaido's cold, snowy environment.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 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

Citations33
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207