Spatial ecology of the mulgara in arid Australia: impact of fire history on home range size and burrow use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Knowledge about the spatial ecology of small mammals in relation to fire history in arid zones in general and Australia in particular is limited. Here, we report data on the spatial ecology of the brush‐tailed mulgara Dasycercus blythi in the hummock grasslands of Uluru – Kata Tjuta National Park during winter 2006, the beginning of the breeding season for this species. About 73% of the study area had been burnt in 2002 and spinifex cover was sparse. Mulgaras Marsupialia: Dasyuridae (six males and three females) were implanted with radio‐transmitters and monitored daily for between 6 and 55 days. All mulgaras appeared to use defined home ranges, which overlapped extensively with those of several neighbours. Spatial overlap occurred between as well as within sexes. On average, males (25.5 ha) occupied significantly larger home ranges than females (10.8 ha). Mulgaras used a number of burrows within home ranges and several were used by more than one individual. Moreover, occasionally, two individuals used the same burrow simultaneously. Home ranges and burrows encompassed both mature spinifex Triodia basedowii and open regrowth areas and mulgaras did not exhibit a significant preference for either habitat type. However, three males were killed by introduced‐predators and they all lived predominantly in the open regrowth area. We conclude that mulgaras do not select the dense cover of mature spinifex habitat, and might be subjected to increased risk from introduced predators, especially following fire.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".