MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2259638971 · doi:10.18473/lepi.v68i1.a8

Microhabitat Use in a Northern Peripheral Population of<i>Apodemia mormo</i>: Factors Beyond the Host Plant

2014· article· en· W2259638971 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ashley Anne Wick, Shelley D. Pruss, J. David Spence, Nadir Erbilgin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Lepidopterists’ Society · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsParks CanadaUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of AlbertaFrancis Crick Institute
KeywordsQuadratButterflyEndangered speciesThreatened speciesHabitatEcologyGeographyHost (biology)National parkPopulationNectarBiologyShrubDemographyPollen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Mormon metalmark (Apodemia mormo) is widely distributed throughout western North America. The species exists in two peripheral populations in Canada and is listed as threatened in Saskatchewan and endangered in British Columbia. In Saskatchewan, this butterfly relies on Eriogonum pauciflorum for larval food and as its primary nectar source; however, presence of its host plant is insufficient to define habitats actually utilized by the butterfly. We investigated microhabitat characteristics that might explain habitat use of A. mormo adults using 102 host plant quadrats in which the butterfly was occupied (present) or unoccupied (absent) in Grasslands National Park and the Val Marie Community Pasture, Saskatchewan. Linear discriminant analysis demonstrated significant differences between occupied and unoccupied quadrats. Apodemia mormo was found disproportionately in quadrats with a combination of the following variables: higher percent bare ground and soil pH, steeper slope, southerly to southwesterly aspect, lower elevation, and lower soil nitrogen. Our results show that habitat use by A. mormo butterflies is correlated with environmental factors that define, either directly or indirectly, the local probability of association with host populations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.384

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.173 · 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.

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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Lepidopterists’ SocietySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207