Bibliographic record
Abstract
The preferences of the deer mouse ( Peromyscus maniculatus (Wagner, 1845)), southern red-backed vole ( Myodes gapperi (Vigors, 1830)), heather vole ( Phenacomys intermedius Merriam, 1889), long-tailed vole ( Microtus longicaudus (Merriam, 1888)), and meadow vole ( Microtus pennsylvanicus (Ord, 1851)) for lodgepole pine ( Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud.), white spruce ( Picea glauca (Moench.) Voss), and subalpine fir ( Abies lasiocarpa (Hook.) Nutt.) seeds were investigated using cafeteria-style feeding experiments. Seed selection by P. maniculatus and M. gapperi in the field was also studied. Peromyscus maniculatus, M. gapperi, M. longicaudus, and M. pennsylvanicus showed a distinct preference for lodgepole pine seeds and avoidance of subalpine fir seeds, and consumed the different species of seeds in similar relative proportions. Phenacomys intermedius behaved very differently from the other rodent species in that it did not show a preference among seed species, and consumed very few seeds in total. Findings from the field seed selection trials were consistent with laboratory results. We suggest that postdispersal seed predation by small mammals could limit the recruitment success of lodgepole pine and white spruce, but would not be a major problem in the regeneration of subalpine fir stands. This could provide an advantage for subalpine fir over neighbouring competitive 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 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".