MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953882006 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2019-0036

Evidence for spring stopover refuelling in migrating silver-haired bats (<i>Lasionycteris</i><i> noctivagans</i>)

2019· article· en· W2953882006 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Kristin A. Jonasson, Christopher G. Guglielmo

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBird Studies CanadaMinistry of Natural ResourcesBat Conservation International
KeywordsInsectivoreBiologyForagingSpring (device)Abundance (ecology)HabitatMark and recaptureEveningEcologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Migrating animals must acquire sufficient fuel to sustain migratory movement, but how time is allocated to achieve this can vary greatly. The fuel strategies used by migrating bats are not well understood and have not been investigated during the spring when insectivorous bats face low food abundance. Migrating silver-haired bats (Lasionycteris noctivagans (Le Conte, 1831)) were captured at a stopover site in Long Point, Ontario, Canada, in April and May of 2012–2014. We followed the movements of 40 bats outfitted with radio transmitters using an automated telemetry array and examined the effects of ambient temperature, fat stores, and sex on stopover duration. As seen previously in autumn, most bats departed the evening following capture, but one-third of bats used multiday stopovers. Extended stopover was associated with lower ambient temperature. There was no effect of sex or fat at capture on stopover departure probability. Bats captured closer to dawn had greater fat mass and lean mass than those captured early in the night, a trend indicative of fuel deposition at this site. This is the first study to provide evidence that bats use stopover habitat for refuelling.

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)0.001
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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicBat Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207