MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924524254 · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2019.103842

A global database on non-volant small mammal composition in natural and human-modified habitats

2019· article· en· W2924524254 on OpenAlexfundno aff
André Luís Luza, Catherine H. Graham, Sandra Maria Hartz

Bibliographic record

VenueData in Brief · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Graduate EducationCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British ColumbiaWest Virginia UniversityUniversity of Minnesota DuluthNorthern Arizona UniversityConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoPennsylvania State UniversityUniversity of Minnesota
KeywordsHabitatComposition (language)MammalEcologyNatural (archaeology)Research articleGeographyBiologyComputer scienceLibrary scienceArchaeologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non-volant small mammals, which include small-bodied representatives from several mammal orders, have been used as a model group to test the effects of habitat conversion and edge creation on biodiversity. Small mammals occupy a large variety of habitat types and vegetation strata, and have varied lifestyles and diets. They include species with slow-to fast-life history (the Etruscan shrew Suncus etruscus and European Hare Lepus europaeus, respectively) and with very specialized to very generalist habits and diets (the Atlantic bamboo rat Kannabateomys amblyonyx and house mouse Mus musculus, respectively). There are no databases with global coverage focusing on small mammal composition in natural and human-modified habitats and that include neglected natural habitats (e.g. grasslands and savannas). Here, peer-reviewed articles were searched in the primary literature to synthesize almost half century (1973–2017) of research on small mammal composition in natural forests, grasslands and their natural edges, and in five types of human-modified habitats (human-induced forest edges, human-induced grassland edges, crop fields, clear-cuts and tree plantations). The complete database includes information from 199 peer-reviewed articles. Presence data were obtained for 534 species (including 30 unidentified) in 551 sites distributed in 45 countries, 92 ecoregions, 10 biomes and six realms. Measurements of sampling effort and number of species records (number of individuals, captures) per habitat were also obtained, from which researchers can calculate a measure of abundance standardized by the sampling effort. The database will be useful for researchers interested in local-to broad-scale patterns of alpha- and beta-diversity in natural and human-modified habitats.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.577

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData in BriefSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207