MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2046095117 · doi:10.1139/z02-193

Tests of emigration in small mammals under experimental conditions

2002· article· en· W2046095117 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Audrey Nelson, Catherine L. Johnson, William J. Matter, R. William Mannan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsEnclosureEmigrationBiologyHouse miceAnimal scienceEcologyGeographyEngineeringArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Holding animals in enclosures that block emigration causes demographic abnormalities called "fence effects." Experimenters have built exits that require animals to move through unfavorable conditions to leave enclosures. There are doubts about whether individuals that cross these challenging exits are true emigrants. We tested whether an exit that required house mice (Mus musculus) to swim through a water-filled trough was used only by mice triggered to emigrate from an experimental enclosure. Also, we examined the responses of mice to the availability of resources and the presence of conspecific adult animals in a small enclosure with an exit and in an enclosure made by joining two single enclosures. All mice left a barren enclosure within 12 h but no mice left during 7-day trials in a resource-rich enclosure during spring and summer. At the end of trials with repeated introduction of pairs of mice, about 85% of resident mice were the first mice added. Nearly all mice added later left the enclosure. A relatively constant number of mice became residents in small enclosures and about 2.3 times as many mice resided in double enclosures. Mice readily found and used exits when motivated to leave and did not accidentally pass through exits during routine exploration. Thus, mice that stayed in enclosures were not "fenced in" by the water-filled exit and exhibited residency as in nature. Tests of exits should give ecologists confidence that animals can display normal residency and emigration behaviors in experimental settings. The defense of resources by residents and the emigration of excess animals resulted in a consistent limit to the number of animals able to reside in enclosures.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations13
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicWildlife Ecology and Conservation→French-language works237,207→