MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110202453

Demography of Montane Voles in Old Field and Orchard Habitats in Southern British Columbia

2003· article· en· W2110202453 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thomas P. Sullivan, E. J. Hogue, Druscilla S. Sullivan

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Exchange (Washington State University) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and biodiversity studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontane ecologyOrchardHabitatGeographyEcologyForestryBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Voles (Microtus spp.) occupy perennial grasslands and agricultural areas in many parts of North America. This study was designed to provide a detailed analysis of the population dynamics of montane voles (M. montanus) in old field and orchard habitats. Vole populations were intensively live-trapped in replicate old field and orchard sites over a 4-year period (1982-86) at Summerland, British Columbia, Canada. Populations of montane voles reached peak densities of 186 and 144 voles/ha in old field sites before declining to numbers averaging less than 60 voles/ha. Orchard populations of montane voles also followed this pattern but at consistently lower numbers than old field sites. This difference in abundance ranged from 2.3-3.6 times during the peak year to 23.8-116.3 times in the decline year, at which time montane voles had declined to a mean number of 0.3-2.4 voles/ha in orchard sites. Length of breeding seasons, proportion of reproductive voles, and mean number of recruits were generally similar in old field and orchard sites. Overall mean survival of voles tended to decline through time in orchard sites, averaging 0.47 compared with old field survival of 0.76. Mean body mass of voles was consistently higher in old field than orchard sites. Montane vole populations in orchards seemed to be linked to source area dynamics of populations in old fields.

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 score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations9
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Exchange (Washington State University)Same topicEcology and biodiversity studiesFrench-language works237,207