MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316473469 · doi:10.1139/z11-053

Pallid bat (<i>Antrozous pallidus</i>) foraging over native and vineyard habitats in British Columbia, Canada

2011· article· en· W2316473469 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Daniela A. Rambaldini, R. Mark Brigham

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaAboriginal Affairs Northern Dev Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForagingPredationHabitatBiologyEcologyThreatened speciesForageAbundance (ecology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optimal foraging theory predicts organisms will forage in habitats providing the most profitable prey. Human alterations to ecosystems may affect predators’ foraging activity by changing landscape features, prey types, and prey availability. Assessing the selection of foraging habitats in a heterogeneous landscape can provide data to improve land management and conservation policies. In Canada, the pallid bat ( Antrozous pallidus (LeConte, 1856); Vespertilionidae) is listed as threatened partly because of loss or modification of shrub–steppe habitat. Our purpose was to determine if vineyards provide a suitable surrogate for foraging habitat relative to native habitat. We used pitfall traps to compare prey abundance in each habitat and analyzed faeces to assess diet composition. Over 24 nights, we surveyed both habitats for foraging bats. Bats foraged over vineyards, but we recorded significantly more foraging activity over native habitat. We collected over 2000 arthropods in pitfall traps and found significantly more in native habitat compared with vineyards. Species eaten by pallid bats were present in both habitats. Scarab beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabidae) and Jerusalem crickets (Orthopthera: Stenopelmatidae) represented the principal prey. The use of vineyards by pallid bats for foraging suggests that while they are adapting to a changing landscape, reduced prey abundance in vineyards may negatively affect them over the long term.

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)0.001
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.160 · 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

Citations11
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicBat Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207