MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041205144 · doi:10.1644/13-mamm-a-115.1

Rodent populations on the northern Great Plains respond to weather variation at a landscape scale

2014· article· en· W2041205144 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Leanne M. Heisler, Christopher M. Somers, Ray G. Poulin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mammalogy · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsRoyal Saskatchewan MuseumUniversity of Regina
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMitacsCanada Research ChairsFriends of the Royal Saskatchewan MuseumUniversity of Regina
KeywordsPeromyscusMicrotusVoleAbundance (ecology)EcologyDeer mouseRodentHabitatGeographySnowPopulationWildlifeGrasslandBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extreme weather variation on the northern Great Plains of North America can potentially influence the abundance of grassland rodents across vast areas. We used the remains of 33,697 small mammals collected from owl pellets in central and western Canada over 15 years to determine the influence of weather on the annual abundance of deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus), sagebrush voles (Lemmiscus curtatus), and meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus). Weather variation affected the annual abundances of all 3 species; however, influence on deer mouse and sagebrush vole annual abundances was relatively small compared to that on meadow voles. This finding may indicate that factors other than weather (i.e., habitat availability) are more important for the abundance of deer mice and sagebrush voles at the landscape scale. In contrast, meadow voles were positively associated with the duration of snow cover above the hiemal threshold (20 cm), exhibiting up to 5-fold increases (i.e., irruptions) in abundance following winters of persistent, deep snow cover. Our study is the first to examine the effects of weather on landscape-scale abundance of rodent species on the northern Great Plains of North America, providing further insight into the role weather plays in driving rodent population fluctuations in this highly seasonal environment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations41
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of MammalogySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207