Temperature-dependent consumption of spiders by little brown bats (<i>Myotis lucifugus</i>), but not northern long-eared bats (<i>Myotis septentrionalis</i>), in northern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intraspecific variation in diet has been observed in many species, including the geographically widespread little brown bat (Myotis lucifugus (Le Conte, 1831)). Spider consumption by M. lucifugus is more common in northern regions of their distribution, possibly due to reduced availability of aerial prey during low temperatures. However, in previously studied northern regions, M. lucifugus was the only bat species captured. The purpose of our study was to examine whether there is overlap in the diet and morphology of M. lucifugus and the northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis (Trouessart, 1897)), a species that commonly gleans prey, in the Northwest Territories, Canada. There were significant differences in the dietary composition and wing morphology of the two species, suggesting partitioning of resources. Both species consumed spiders, although unlike M. septentrionalis, the probability of M. lucifugus consuming spiders was significantly greater at low temperatures. Myotis lucifugus demonstrated a different pattern of spider consumption than in other northern regions where it consumes spiders throughout the summer, suggesting the possibility of resource competition where M. lucifugus overlaps with M. septentrionalis. Further research is needed to determine whether arthropods are seasonally limiting at high latitudes and to examine how these species capture nonaerial prey, including spiders.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".