MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106688250 · doi:10.1139/z06-037

Environmental stochasticity: empirical estimates of prairie vole survival with implications for demographic models

2006· article· en· W2106688250 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aaron W. Reed, Norman A. Slade

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationInnovative Research Group Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsVital ratesMicrotusBiologyVoleEcologyPrairie volePopulationMark and recaptureDemographyTrophic levelPopulation cyclePopulation growthPredation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A rich theory exists regarding the potential impact of correlations among vital rates on population projections derived from demographic models. However, relatively little is known about the magnitude of correlations among vital rates in natural populations, particularly in mammals. We used 30 years of mark–recapture data from a population of prairie voles ( Microtus ochrogaster (Wagner, 1842)) to test for differences in survival among mass classes and sexes, in correlations among vital rates, in correlations between vital rates and environmental factors, and in autocorrelation in vital rates. Estimated monthly survival rates did not differ significantly among mass classes and there were no significant cross-correlations among mass classes. Survival of large prairie voles increased in mild winters (i.e., warm temperatures and low snowfall). Survival rates of medium and large voles were negatively autocorrelated at time lags of 9–12 months, and survivals of large voles were positively autocorrelated for time lags of <3 months. These autocorrelations were not explained by patterns of temperature or precipitation. The observed degree of autocorrelation in vital rates is sufficient to affect projections from demographic models, particularly in short-lived taxa that require seasonal or monthly estimation of vital rates.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.899

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

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

Citations10
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207