MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2255352312 · doi:10.18473/lepi.69i2.a11

Notes on the Demography, Life History, and Behavior of the White Mountain Arctic Butterfly (<i>Oeneis melissa semidea</i>)

2015· article· en· W2255352312 on OpenAlexafffund
Angela E. Gradish, Gard W. Otis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Lepidopterists’ Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Forest Service
KeywordsButterflyArcticWhite (mutation)DemographyGeographyThe arcticEcologyBiologyOceanographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The White Mountain Arctic butterfly [WMA; Oeneis melissa semidea (Say, 1828)] is endemic to the alpine zone of the Presidential Range of the White Mountains, New Hampshire, USA. Although it has been listed as “imperiled”, many biological characteristics of the WMA important for its conservation assessment and management are unknown. We conducted field studies in 2011 and 2012 to further characterize the WMA's demography, life history, and behavior. In both years, adults emerged in mid-June and occurred on Mts. Washington and Jefferson in association with Bigelow's sedge (Carex bigelowii). On both mountains, adult numbers generally were very low, suggesting that the population has declined considerably since its first description. Adults dispersed among some of the meadows on Mt. Washington, but we were unable to confirm if they moved between Mts. Washington and Jefferson. Adults generally congregated on rocky ledges and out-croppings, where males employed both perching and patrolling mate-locating strategies. In addition to elevation (high points in the landscape), adults used other cues when choosing sites at which to congregate. Finally, although many other Oeneis species engage in male territoriality, our observations suggest that WMA males are not truly territorial.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Lepidopterists’ SocietySame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207