MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multiscale Occupancy Patterns of Anurans in Prairie Wetlands

2016· article· en· W2523011064 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kyle D. Gustafson, Robert A. Newman

Bibliographic record

VenueHerpetologica · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Forest Service
KeywordsOccupancyWetlandEcologyAmphibianHabitatGeographyLandscape ecologyHylidaeBorealBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Habitat loss and degradation appear to be the primary drivers of amphibian declines. Given the losses of native prairie and prairie wetlands, it is essential to understand the habitat conditions that support amphibian species in remaining prairie ecosystems. In this study, we combine wetland surveys, geographic information systems (GIS), and hierarchical statistical modeling to assess anuran occupancy relationships with wetland and landscape factors. We surveyed 141 wetlands with repeated sampling for amphibian breeding activity (calling, eggs, tadpoles, metamorphs) in the Sheyenne National Grasslands—one of the largest contiguous prairies on the North American continent. Overall we observed evidence of seven amphibian species breeding in the Sheyenne National Grasslands. Species with ubiquitous distributions (Boreal Chorus Frogs) or species that occurred infrequently (Canadian Toads and Great Plains Toads) had little variance in occupancy. However, Northern Leopard Frogs, Wood Frogs, and Gray Treefrogs exhibited occupancy relationships with wetland and landscape variables. Our results establish a baseline understanding of current prairie amphibian–habitat relationships. Furthermore, they indicate that integrating local and landscape variables into occupancy models that account for spatial autocorrelation can provide a better understanding of amphibian ecology, and can inform conservation and restoration programs.

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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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)0.0040.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHerpetologicaSame topicAmphibian and Reptile BiologyFrench-language works237,207