MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028282385 · doi:10.1139/z01-207

The maritime shrew, <i>Sorex maritimensis</i> (Insectivora: Soricidae): a newly recognized Canadian endemic

2002· article· en· W2028282385 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Donald T. Stewart, Neil Perry, Luca Fumagalli

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Montana
KeywordsSubspeciesShrewInsectivoraBiologySorexZoologyAraneusMonophylyAllopatric speciationEvolutionary biologyEcologyPhylogenetic treeCladePopulationGeneticsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous morphological and cytological analyses have suggested that the arctic shrew (Sorex arcticus) as currently recognized may be two distinct species. Specifically, those studies demonstrated considerable differentiation between the putative subspecies S. a. maritimensis and one or both of the other two subspecies, S. a. arcticus and S. a. laricorum. Phylogenetic analysis of 546 base pairs of cytochrome b sequence data from 10 arctic shrews from across Canada indicates that maritimensis is the sister-group to arcticus + laricorum. Furthermore, there is considerable genetic divergence between maritimensis and the other two putative subspecies (~8–9%; Kimura's two-parameter distance). Given that maritimensis and arcticus + laricorum appear to be reciprocally monophyletic clades with considerable genetic divergence (i.e., greater than that between other recognized pairs of sister-species within the S. araneus–arcticus group), we propose that S. maritimensis be recognized as a distinct species. The proportion of third-position transversion substitutions between S. arcticus and S. maritimensis suggests that these two species shared a common ancestor approximately 2.4 million years ago.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score0.516

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.162 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicBat Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207