MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164764639 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v128i2.1587

Muskrat (<em>Ondatra zibethicus</em>) interference with aquatic invertebrate traps

2014· article· en· W2164764639 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Michael C. Cavallaro, Anson R. Main, Christy A. Morrissey

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInvertebrateWetlandEcologyFaunaAquatic ecosystemWildlifeBiologyAquatic insectLarva

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In field biology, interactions between wildlife and in situ equipment occur often. These interactions have the potential to induce a variety of behaviours in local fauna. Here, we note the destructive behaviour exhibited by the Muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) following deployment of aquatic invertebrate traps for research purposes at 12 wetlands located in central Saskatchewan. Of 24 aquatic insect emergence traps used on seven wetlands in our study, 14 (58%) required recurring repairs. In addition, on several occasions, leaf litter bags and their anchoring stakes were torn or chewed. The recurring damage took place in wetlands with Muskrat lodges. We recommend structural modifications to aquatic invertebrate traps in wetland complexes densely inhabited by Muskrats and other semi-aquatic rodents.

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 score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.002

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 head0.195
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207