MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2906802869 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v132i2.2056

Long-toed Salamander (<i>Ambystoma macrodactylum</i>) hibernacula in Waterton Lakes National Park revealed using Passive Integrated Transponder telemetry

2019· article· en· W2906802869 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Matthew R. Atkinson-Adams, Christopher J. Price, Garry J. Scrimgeour, Cynthia A. Paszkowski

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsGovernment of AlbertaUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of AlbertaParks CanadaAlberta Conservation Association
KeywordsSalamanderOverwinteringFossorialTransponder (aeronautics)National parkEcologyHabitatFisheryGeographyArchaeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long-toed Salamanders (Ambystoma macrodactylum) spend most of their lives on land; however, their fossorial nature makes studying their use of habitat difficult. Using Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) telemetry over two years, we found and characterized nine overwintering sites of Long-toed Salamanders in the vicinity of Linnet Lake and Stable Pond in Waterton Lakes National Park, excavating five of them. These sites were typically associated with stumps and decaying root systems that gave the salamanders access to deep subterranean hibernacula. Overwintering sites were located up to 168 m from the shores of breeding ponds. Given the importance of such terrestrial sites to these populations of Long-toed Salamanders, it is vital that conservation efforts include the preservation of these features and ensure that a sufficient area surrounding breeding ponds remains undisturbed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.222
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicAmphibian and Reptile BiologyFrench-language works237,207