The Effect of Canine Tooth Wear on the Diet of Big Brown Bats (<i>Eptesicus fuscus</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine whether canine wear influences the diet of big brown bats (Eptesicus fuscus). We hypothesized that tooth wear reduces the ability to consume hard-bodied insects, such as beetles, and that older E. fuscus (those with worn canines) would thus include fewer beetles in their diet than younger individuals (those with less-worn canines) do. We examined 600 fecal pellets collected from 60 female bats captured at a single maternity colony in southeastern Alberta, Canada. The diets of two groups were similar in composition, despite considerable differences in canine wear. Diets were dominated by beetles (Coleoptera), which accounted for 30 to 40% of the identifiable food items. Younger bats included more beetles in their diet, although the difference was not statistically significant. The results suggest that older bats are still able to use their worn canines to effectively puncture hard exoskeleton, perhaps because of the angular shape of the worn teeth.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".