Spatial distribution of feral house mice during a population eruption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
:Seasonal movements of rodents in agro-ecosystems from refuge habitats to impact habitats could reflect tracking of resources by mice and may be linked to population eruptions. We monitored the abundance of house mice in refuge habitat (fencelines) and impact habitats (crops) at four farms in southeastern Australia using capture-mark-release trappings during a population eruption. For most of the year, mice did not prefer fencelines to the adjacent “sea of grain crops”, but 3 to 4 months post-harvest more mice populated refuge habitats than impact habitats. This preference for refuge habitat coincided with a considerable increase in mouse abundance and the depletion of food in the stubble of the harvested crops. Therefore, habitat choice by mice seems to predominantly track resources such as food and shelter. The percentage of recaptures within months was highest in the crop habitat, indicating higher site fidelity for mice caught there. Mice captured in crop habitats were generally representative of the demographic structure of those mice living along the crop margin. Six months post-harvest, mice living in crops were smaller, and possibly lower-quality emigrants from the fencelines. Foraging movements measured with the fluorescent biomarker Rhodamine B commonly extended about 20-30 m from the fenceline into the crop.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".