Factors influencing ultraviolet radiation dose to developing frogs in northern vernal pools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ultraviolet-B (UV-B) radiation exposure is one hypothesized mechanism explaining amphibian population declines and malformations, but it is rarely quantified in amphibian habitats. We measured spatial and temporal variations in northern vernal pools with UV-B attenuation through the water column, incident UV-B across pool surfaces and seasons, and cumulative UV-B dose. Atmospheric, local, and landscape effects were compared with variances across spatial and temporal scales, plus influence on exposure risk. Risk was evaluated using published reports on detrimental levels for amphibian survival and health, with life history and behavior of vernal pool breeding Rana sylvatica L. (wood frog). Pools were exposed to sufficiently high UV-B at or near the surface for developing amphibians to be at risk of reduced survival, altered growth, and malformation. Atmospheric conditions, vegetative cover, and water column properties significantly influenced UV-B levels, with oviposition and larval behavior controlling actual embryonic and larval exposure. UV-B risk to vernal pool species is greater than predicted in previous studies. Given changes in light regimes, climate change, and forest harvesting, amphibian UV-B exposure could reach levels of great concern.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".