MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2557914283 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v130i3.1880

Selection of Agricultural Foods by Eastern Grey Squirrels (<i>Sciurus carolinensis</i>): Implications for a New Introduction in British Columbia

2016· article· en· W2557914283 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Jillian M McAllister, Valerie Law, Karl W. Larsen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers University
FundersMinistry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource OperationsThompson Rivers University
KeywordsSciurus carolinensisSciurusOrchardAgriculturePopulationGeographyBiologySelection (genetic algorithm)EcologyDemographyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent introduction of the Eastern Grey Squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis) into south-central British Columbia occurred within an important agricultural zone. As repercussions for the fruit-growing sector are currently unknown, we conducted trials with captive squirrels to understand the range of fruits consumed and their references. The squirrels consumed a portion of every food item offered, although the order in which the foods were used was inconsistent (with sharp contrasts between animals). Of the fruit types offered, apples appeared to be of greatest overall interest. However, seeds and nuts tended to be used first when presented in combination with fruit, suggesting opportunities to use these food types to deflect or remove Eastern Grey Squirrels from orchard crops. We caution that our results may not reflect the food items that free-ranging Eastern Grey Squirrels will target or disregard once densities in the introduced population become higher and the availability of food on a local scale begins to exert an effect.

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)0.001
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 score0.391
Threshold uncertainty score0.786

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207