Interactive effects of distance and matrix on the movements of a peatland dragonfly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We conducted a mark–release–recapture survey of a peatland dragonfly ( Leucorrhinia hudsonica ) in each of two years (2002; 2003) in a harvested forest landscape in western Newfoundland, Canada. The odds of an individual male moving between peatlands was influenced by both the distance between peatlands and the type of intervening habitat (the matrix). Specifically, at meso scales (>700 m) there was a positive effect of the amount of cut matrix between peatlands on the odds of moving, but at fine scales (<700 m) there was the opposite effect; proportionally fewer individuals moved between peatlands. The odds of moving out of a peatland decreased as the surface area of water in the peatland increased. Multi‐state mark–recapture models showed that the daily probability of a male moving between any two peatlands was 1.9% in 2002 and 6.9% in 2003 (n=1527 and 1280 marked individuals). The results suggest that additional empirical studies that directly measure patterns of movement with respect to landscape structure at multiple spatial scales in other taxa and situations are needed in order to uncover other possible non‐linear changes in behavior.
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 | 0.000 | 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".