Using Chorus-Size Ranks from Call Surveys to Estimate Reproductive Activity of the Wood Frog (Rana sylvatica)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Call surveys are a relatively new and efficient technique for detecting the presence of breeding male anurans. Using data from multiple surveys of breeding choruses of Wood Frogs (Rana sylvatica) combined with counts of egg masses on ponds in west-central Alberta we determined (1) the relationship between ranks of chorus size and total number of egg masses in ponds, and (2) number of breeding males in standard chorus-size ranks (1, 2 and 3). Estimates for Rank 3 choruses were based on a formula with number of egg masses present per pond and a fixed male to female ratio of 2:1 calculated from the literature. Calling males were recorded from all ponds that had evidence of female reproductive activity (i.e., egg masses). Generalized linear models suggested that ranks were positively and linearly correlated with the number of egg masses in a pond. In addition, call data from only the second of four sampling periods (each 3–6 days) significantly predicted number of egg masses in ponds, suggesting that timing is important when surveying calling wood frogs. The mean number of chorusing males per rank did not correspond to aural ranks of calling intensity: Rank 1 = 1.3 males, Rank 2 = 3.7 males, and Rank 3 = 118 males. We recommend similar assessments for other widely distributed species to improve our ability to detect and interpret habitat-use patterns and population trends of amphibians through monitoring programs.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".