MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PHYSIOLOGICAL AND ECOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF ROOST SELECTION BY REPRODUCTIVE FEMALE HOARY BATS (LASIURUS CINEREUS)

2005· article· en· W2177738110 on OpenAlexaff
Craig K. R. Willis, R. Mark Brigham

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mammalogy · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroclimateCanopyEcologyContext (archaeology)Temperate rainforestTree canopyForagingBiologyGeographyEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most recent research on the roosting habits of temperate, forest-living bats has focused on species that use enclosed cavities, but less has been done to address roosting by foliage-living species, which are assumed to have more flexible roost requirements. Numerous studies have suggested that bats select roosts on the basis of microclimate, yet few have tested this hypothesis empirically and none have addressed the use of foliage roosts in this context. We used radiotelemetry to locate roost sites of reproductive female hoary bats ('Lasiurus cinereus') then compared a variety of physical features of these trees with randomly selected nonroost trees. We also recorded ambient temperature and wind speed at roost and nonroost sites to test the hypothesis that physical features associated with foliage roosts provide energetic benefits. Hoary bats selected roost sites on the southeast side of mature white spruce trees ('Picea glauca'; X orientation 158.6 ± 6.3° SSE). Roost trees were more likely than random trees to be the same height as the surrounding forest canopy; had less canopy cover facing out from the tree in the direction of the roost branch; and had lower forest density on their southeast side. Wind speed was significantly lower at roosts sites compared with opposite sides of the same trees, presumably due to increased protection from prevailing west winds. Incorporating an estimate of convective cooling due to wind, we predicted daily thermal energy expenditure for normothermic bats and found that selected roost sites provided statistically significant energy savings (up to 1.60 ± 0.99 kJ/day) relative to the predicted expenditures if bats had roosted on the opposite sides of trees. Our results provide direct evidence that hoary bats select forest roosts on the basis of microclimate and suggest that roost requirements of foliage-roosting species may be more specific than has been previously assumed.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations120
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of MammalogySame topicBat Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207