Mate location tactics in garter snakes: effects of rival males, interrupted trails and non‐pheromonal cues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary The ability to follow substrate‐deposited scent trails using sophisticated vomeronasal abilities is a key feature of snake biology. However, previous research on this topic has derived mostly from a highly artificial test situation: captive snakes following continuous trails over structurally simple homogeneous substrates, in the absence of any other cues (e.g. visual or olfactory) either from the target of that search or from other snakes. Our field experimental trials with Red‐Sided Garter Snakes (Thamnophis sirtalis parietalis) at a communal den in Manitoba explored wider issues in mate location. Males followed a female's trail less successfully if she had recently been followed by rival males, suggesting that trailing males obscured the cues left by the female. Males that lost contact with a female's trail exhibited stereotyped, spatially extensive and prolonged circling behaviour centred on the last point at which the trail was detectable; in nature, this behaviour would maximize the male's ability to relocate a discontinuous trail. Trail‐following males switched from chemical to visual cues as soon as they were close to a female, enhancing speed but decreasing the accuracy of mate location (because males could distinguish between females and other males based on either visual or airborne olfactory cues). Incorporating additional cues and broader spatial scales can clarify aspects of trail‐following behaviour not evident from studies in small, highly simplified laboratory situations.
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 | 0.000 | 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".