MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041118187 · doi:10.1139/z01-197

Microhabitat use by the snow vole <i>Chionomys nivalis</i> in alpine environments reflects rock-dwelling preferences

2002· article· en· W2041118187 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Juán José Luque-Larena, Pílar López, Joaquím Gosálbez

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGeneralitat de Catalunya
KeywordsEcologyBiologyHabitatReproductive successVoleBiotopeMicroclimateSnowPredationPopulationGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Environmental conditions in mountainous regions have influenced the nature of some adaptations among small mammals and this may apply to strategies of habitat use in alpine biotopes. In the present paper, microhabitat use in relation to microhabitat availability of a population of snow voles Chionomys nivalis Martins, 1842, a nonhibernating microtine rodent that inhabits high-mountain environments exclusively, was studied. The results show that C. nivalis did not use microhabitats in proportion to availability, suggesting a preference for certain habitat characteristics. Chionomys nivalis strongly used scree areas at all times, whereas the use of available areas of mixed shrubs (Juniperus communis and Cytisus oromediterraneus) and Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) was lower than expected. Factors other than food, such as favourable microclimate or refuge from predators, might determine regular use of rocky microhabitats. The results also revealed differences in the use of rocky structures related to sex and reproductive condition, suggesting different strategies of spatial use related to reproductive tasks. Juveniles and reproductive females used central zones of the scree and areas with scree junipers (J. communis) significantly more than expected, whereas reproductive males and nonreproductive adults used scree areas in proportion to availability. Based on its unique morphological, physiological, and ecological characteristics, C. nivalis can be considered a rock-dwelling specialist of alpine environments.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations35
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207