MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2327107089 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2012-0335

Seasonality and interspecific and intraspecific asynchrony in emergence from the nest by hatchling freshwater turtles

2013· article· en· W2327107089 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Peter Baker, Jon P. Costanzo, John B. Iverson, R.E. Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurtle Biology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHatchlingBiologyNest (protein structural motif)Intraspecific competitionEcologyInterspecific competitionPainted turtleTurtle (robot)ZoologyHatching

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Timing of emergence from the natal nest is a variable trait in the life history of turtles. In theory, hatchling turtles that emerge synchronously, within and among nests, should gain a survival advantage over hatchlings that emerge independently. We examined emergence patterns for seven species of freshwater turtles that use a common nesting area in northern Indiana, USA. Hatchlings of four species emerged from the nest exclusively in late summer or early fall. However, hatchlings of three species usually overwintered in the nest chamber and emerged the following spring. Interspecific and intraspecific emergence from the nest was more synchronous in fall than in spring. Mean date of fall emergence from the nest did not vary among species; however, a species-specific pattern of emergence was observed in spring. Midland Painted Turtles (Chrysemys picta marginata Agassiz, 1857) emerged in late March and early April and, on average, these hatchlings left their nests 2 weeks earlier than Northern Map Turtles (Graptemys geographica (Le Sueur, 1817)) and 4 weeks earlier than Red-eared Sliders (Trachemys scripta elegans (Wied-Neuwied, 1839)). Although hatchlings of C. p. marginata are smaller than those of G. geographica and T. s. elegans, presumably they gain a survival or growth advantage by emerging earlier.

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 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 score0.375
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicTurtle Biology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207