Post-breeding movement and habitat use by wood frogs along an Arctic–Subarctic ecotone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By altering essential micro- and macrohabitat conditions for many organisms, climate change is already causing disproportionately greater impacts on Arctic and Subarctic ecosystems. Yet there is a lack of basic information about many species in northern latitudes, including amphibians. We used radio telemetry to study the post-breeding movements and habitat use of wood frogs (Rana [=Lithobates] sylvatica) in the Hudson Bay Lowlands near Churchill, Manitoba, Canada. We tracked fifty-seven frogs (thirty-five males, twenty-two females; mean duration = 16.8 d) from three wetlands during the summers of 2015 and 2016. The three wetlands were representative of the Arctic–Subarctic ecotone, with each wetland surrounded by different proportions of boreal forest and tundra. Our results indicate that at the landscape scale, movement distances increased with temperature, and all frogs spent more time in the tundra habitat than in boreal forests, relative to the availability of each habitat type. At the microhabitat scale (1 m2 plots), frogs selected areas with greater amounts of standing water, sedge, and shrubs. These results provide information on terrestrial movement patterns and critical habitat data for northern populations of wood frogs in a Subarctic environment, which will aid in understanding how climate change will affect amphibians in this rapidly changing ecosystem.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.001 |
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".