Thermoregulation and roost selection by reproductive female big brown bats (<i>Eptesicus fuscus</i>) roosting in rock crevices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A free‐ranging maternity colony of big brown bats Eptesicus fuscus roosting in rock crevices along the South Saskatchewan River in south‐eastern Alberta, Canada, was studied to understand better the discrepancy that exists in the literature regarding torpor use by reproductive female bats. Using radio‐telemetry, thermoregulatory patterns and roost microclimate were recorded for pregnant, lactating and post‐lactating females. Relative torpor use is described in several ways: the proportion of days on which torpor was used, depth, minimum body temperature, time spent in torpor, and a comprehensive torpor unit (degree‐min). Pregnant and lactating female E. fuscus used torpor to the same extent overall (degree‐min), but pregnant bats used torpor less frequently and with more time in deep torpor. Torpor was used to the greatest extent after weaning (post‐lactation). Evidence is presented that the cost:benefit ratio for deep and prolonged periods of torpor may be highest during lactation. Microclimates of rock‐crevice roosts mirrored the use of torpor throughout reproduction by bats. Lactation roosts (deeper, larger opening size) were more thermally stable and remained warmer at night compared to the shallow roosts used by pregnant and post‐lactating females. It is shown that conclusions about relative use of torpor can differ depending on the units of comparison, necessitating measurement of all aspects of torpor (depth, duration and frequency). Comprehensive measurements, individual‐based normothermic temperatures, and a definition of torpor that accounts for all energy savings, allow a more accurate depiction of patterns and facilitates inter‐study comparisons.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".