The good mother: Does nest-site selection constitute parental investment in turtles?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We tested the hypothesis that female midland painted turtles ( Chrysemys picta marginata Agassiz, 1857) provide significant parental care to their offspring through their choice of nest site. Painted turtle nest sites can be described in relation to specific microhabitat characteristics that, because of their effects on soil microclimate, may influence survival to hatch. We created models of the relationships between nest-site microhabitat and nest-site selection and between nest-site microhabitat and survival to hatch, and judged the fit of the models using Akaike’s information criterion corrected for small sample sizes. Female painted turtles selected nest sites with little canopy cover, little understory vegetation, and a southwestern slope aspect. Increased survival to hatch was associated with decreased organic content, which may serve as a surrogate for little or no vegetation or canopy cover. Nests in sites selected by turtles had slightly higher survival to hatch rates than nests in randomly chosen sites, suggesting that turtles may choose nest sites which increase offspring survival. Selection of nest sites may constitute significant parental investment and should be considered in studies of turtle life history.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".