MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2324602597 · doi:10.1139/z2012-044

Growth and maturity of a terrestrial ectotherm near its northern distributional limit: does latitude matter?

2012· article· en· W2324602597 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Krysia N. Tuttle, Patrick T. Gregory

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of VictoriaAlberta Conservation Association
KeywordsEctothermBiologyLatitudeForagingEcologyHabitatCompetition (biology)Range (aeronautics)PopulationBergmann's ruleGrowing seasonGeographyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-latitude environments are challenging for terrestrial ectotherms because short and cool active seasons generally limit the time available for foraging and growth, thereby negatively influencing life-history variables such as growth rate and age at maturity and ultimately, via fitness differences, their evolution. Many species show latitudinal clines in life-history traits, including growth rate and body size. We estimated growth curves of Plains Garter Snakes ( Thamnophis radix (Baird and Girard, 1853)) near the northern limit of the species’ range in central Alberta and compared our findings to similar estimates for more southerly populations. Despite a short growing season, female T. radix at Miquelon Lake grew rapidly, reaching maturity in 1 or 2 years, similar to southern populations, and attained greater maximum sizes than snakes in southern populations. Overall, growth in this high-latitude population is comparable with what is seen in other conspecific populations. Possible reasons for lack of marked latitudinal effect include longer days at high latitudes, highly productive aquatic habitats for foraging, effective thermoregulation, reduced competition, and (or) countergradient variation in growth rate.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations15
Published2012
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicWildlife Ecology and Conservation→French-language works237,207→