Intersexual niche divergence in northern map turtles (Graptemys geographica): the roles of diet and habitat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual dimorphism in body size and in trophic morphology are common in animals and are often concordant with patterns of habitat use and diet. Proximate factors leading to intersexual differences in habitat use, however, are challenging to unravel because these differences may stem from sexual dimorphism or may be caused by intersexual competition. Intersexual differences in diet and habitat use are common in size dimorphic reptiles. In this study, we investigated factors contributing to intersexual differences in diet and habitat use in a population of northern map turtles ( Graptemys geographica (Le Sueur, 1817)) from Ontario, Canada. Using radiotelemetry, we showed that in a lake map turtles do not exhibit intersexual differences in habitat use, in contrast to river populations. Patterns of habitat use were also inconsistent with prey distribution. The lack of intersexual habitat use differences in our lake population, despite marked differences in prey distribution, also indicated that intersexual habitat use differences documented in river populations are a consequence of sexual dimorphism in swimming capacity. Using stable isotope analysis and fecal analysis, we found a large dietary overlap between males and females, indicating no intersexual competition for food. Patterns of prey selection in females, however, were concordant with the reproductive role hypothesis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".