Testing for the relative contribution of patch neighborhood, patch internal structure, and presence of predators and competitor species in determining distribution patterns of rodents in a fragmented landscape
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Factors affecting the distribution of species in fragmented landscapes, and their relative importance, are often unclear. Few studies have deliberately compared various hypotheses in relatively controlled conditions. Moreover, most studies to date have not incorporated false absences in their modeling. Following a multiple hypotheses testing framework, we tested the relative role of landscape structure, patch and neighborhood configuration, patch internal structure, presence or absence of predators, and presence or absence and abundance of potential competitor species on the occupancy patterns of three rodent species ( Myodes glareolus (Schreber, 1780), Apodemus flavicollis (Melchior, 1834), Apodemus sylvaticus (L., 1758)) in a highly fragmented landscape in Tuscany, central Italy. Distribution patterns and occupancy dynamics of the three rodent species were affected by patch and patch neighborhood characteristics, as well as the vicinity of other patches occupied by the species. However, we found no relevant effect of the surrounding landscape structure, patch internal structure, predator patch use, and abundance or distribution of potential competitor species. The observed spatial correlation between populations and the evidence of colonization or extinction events suggest that a metapopulation approach could provide a good framework for understanding the long-term dynamics of these populations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".