Correlations between personality traits and roosting behaviours suggest a behavioural syndrome in little brown bats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Behavioural syndromes are composed of correlated suites of personality traits and can include traits related to the behaviour and ecology of free-ranging animals. We used captive little brown bats (Myotis lucifugus) to test the hypothesis that behaviours measured in standardized tests reflect personality traits and form behavioural syndromes with roosting behaviours. We predicted: (1) measured behaviours would be repeatable; (2) personality traits and roosting behaviours would form behavioural syndromes; and (3) individuals with similar personality scores would associate more strongly. We observed repeatability for some traits and evidence of behavioural syndromes. Activity was strongly repeatable across time and contexts. More central individuals roosted in larger groups, while individuals with high roost-fidelity roosted in larger groups. Individuals with similar activity scores were also more likely to associate in day roosts, suggesting some behavioural assortment. Our results have implications for how behavioural variation might influence transmission of white-nose syndrome.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".