Geographic variation in body size of American mink ( Mustela vison ) / Variation géographique de la taille du corps chez le vison d'Amérique ( Mustela vison )
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Spatial variation in 26 morphological characters of American mink ( Mustela vison ) from 35 localities in North America was investigated using univariate and multivariate statistical analyses. Localities were chosen based on watersheds, and it was hypothesized that high levels of gene flow in minks would prevent partitioning of body size variation within watersheds. All 26 characters in males and 25 of 26 in females exhibited significant interlocality variation. The patterns of variation in body size resulting from principal components analysis indicated that, for both sexes, minks were largest in Alaska, Manitoba, and Alberta; smallest minks were found in Florida and Quebec. There did not appear to be a relationship between body size and geographic proximity. Environmental factors collectively were found to be related to body size, although individual variables were not typically significant. Of 16 environmental variables examined, only longitude was correlated with body size in both sexes, with largest minks in the west and smallest in the east. Latitude was also correlated with body size in females. It was concluded that variation in body size of mink was likely the result of more than one factor that includes both biotic and abiotic features.
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 | 0.001 | 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".