MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993219317 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2019-0137

Insular dwarfism in female Eastern Hog-nosed Snakes (<i>Heterodon platirhinos</i>; Dipsadidae) on a barrier island

2019· article· en· W2993219317 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John P. Vanek, Russell L. Burke

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWildlife Conservation Society
KeywordsBiologyEctothermBarrier islandPredationEcologyMainlandZoologyPopulationFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The island rule postulates that the special ecological conditions on islands, such as limited resource availability, can cause populations of large-bodied animals to evolve smaller sizes and small-bodied populations to evolve larger sizes. Although support for the island rule is well documented (with notable exceptions and debate) in mammals and birds, similar trends are poorly explored in ectothermic vertebrates. As part of a larger study investigating the ecology of Eastern Hog-nosed Snakes (Heterodon platirhinos Latreille, 1801), we compared the mean and maximum sizes of a population from a barrier island (∼4 000 ha) to snakes on an adjacent larger island (∼363 000 ha) and two mainland sites (450 total snakes across all study sites). We did not observe a difference between the small and the large islands, but we did find differences between the smallest island and the mainland. Female snakes on the barrier island were 8% smaller than those on the mainland, and the female from the largest barrier island was 35% smaller than the largest documented H. platirhinos. In addition, we found that males did not exhibit dwarfism. We hypothesize that the observed dwarfism is a result of limited availability of large prey items and recommend that future studies distinguish between sexes in their analyses.

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicAmphibian and Reptile BiologyFrench-language works237,207