MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Habitat‐specific behavioural thermoregulation by black rat snakes ( <i>Elaphe obsoleta obsoleta</i> )

2002· article· en· W2108040553 on OpenAlexafffund
Gabriel Blouin‐Demers, Patrick J. Weatherhead

Bibliographic record

VenueOikos · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersParks CanadaMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsEctothermThermoregulationHabitatForagingEcologyPredationBiologyTemperate climate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thermoregulation is thought to be the most important factor influencing habitat selection by terrestrial ectotherms, at least in temperate climates. The cost‐benefit model of thermoregulation predicts that ectotherms should invest more in thermoregulation when the costs of doing so are low (when the thermal quality of the habitat is high). However, the extent to which ectotherms vary their thermoregulatory behaviour according to the thermal quality of habitats is currently unknown. We studied the relationship between habitat use and thermoregulation in 53 black rat snakes using temperature‐sensitive radio‐transmitters. Among the habitats available to black rat snakes, edges had the highest thermal quality, retreat sites and forest were intermediate, and open habitats had the lowest thermal quality. Black rat snakes experienced more favourable body temperatures while in barns (retreat sites) than in edges, and in edges than in forest. During the day, the effectiveness and the extent of thermoregulation by the snakes were equal in barns and forest, but much lower in edges. In fact, black rat snakes selected thermally favourable microhabitats less than their availability while in edges. Therefore, more favourable body temperatures were not necessarily achieved in thermally superior habitats by increased thermoregulation, but simply because favourable temperatures were encountered more often in those habitats. This result is contrary to the central prediction of the cost‐benefit model of thermoregulation and we suggest that this model should be modified to put more emphasis on other costs of thermoregulation, such as increased predation risk or lost foraging opportunities.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations130
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOikosSame topicAmphibian and Reptile BiologyFrench-language works237,207