Scale and landscape perception: the case of refuge use by Boreal Toads (<i>Anaxyrus boreas boreas</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Refugia likely represent a critical resource necessary for the persistence of populations of Boreal Toads ( Anaxyrus boreas boreas (Baird and Girard, 1852)) in a given area. However, the features that define suitable refuge microsites and the extent to which the habitat surrounding refugia is exploited remains unclear. We sought to describe refuge characteristics in the context of their surroundings and to determine whether local-scale movement behaviour associated with refuge use might provide a novel perspective of landscape-level habitat selection. A pilot study suggested that refugia were selected primarily for physical structure in the form of coarse woody debris, but this was not the case. Instead, refugia provided favourable microclimates with elevated relative humidity compared with the surrounding habitat. Boreal Toads tended to forage at night within 15 m from refugia. This distance was used to calculate activity centres across toad summer home ranges. Activity centres prioritized the importance of treeless habitat overall and wetland habitat for females when compared with 50% core home ranges. This approach could be used to pinpoint critical habitat at the landscape scale, which may be of particular importance for conserving populations currently 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".