From monogamy to complexity: social organization of arctic foxes (<i>Vulpes lagopus</i>) in contrasting ecosystems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canids display pronounced intraspecific variation in social organization, ranging from single breeding females to large and complex groups. Despite several hypotheses in this matter, little is understood about the ecological factors underlying this flexibility. We have used the arctic fox ( Vulpes lagopus (L., 1758)) to investigate how contrasting ecosystem conditions concerning resources and predation influence group formation. We predicted that complex groups are more common in resource-rich ecosystems with predators, whereas simple groups occur in more marginal ecosystems without predators. Samples from 54 groups were collected from four populations of arctic foxes with contrasting prey resources and predation and these samples were genotyped in 10 microsatellite loci. We found considerable variation between ecosystems and a significant relationship between resources and formation of complex groups. We conclude that sufficient amounts of food is a prerequisite for forming complex groups, but that defense against predation further increases the benefits of living in larger groups. We present a conceptual model suggesting that a trade-off between the cost of resource depletion and the benefits obtained for guarding against predators explain the differences in social organization. The variable ecology of the arctic foxes makes it is a plausible model species for understanding the connection between ecology and social organization also in other species.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".