Rattlesnake migrations and the implications of thermal landscapes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The importance of thermal resources to terrestrial ectotherms has been well documented but less often considered in larger-scale analyses of habitat use and selection, such as those routinely conducted using standard habitat features such as vegetation and physical structure. Selection of habitat based on thermal attributes may be of particular importance for ectothermic species, especially in colder climates. In Canada, Western Rattlesnakes (Crotalus oreganus) reach their northern limits, with limited time to conduct annual migratory movements between hibernacula and summer habitat. We radio-tracked 35 male snakes departing from 10 different hibernacula. We examined coarse-scale differences in migratory movements across the region, and then compared the route of each snake with thermal landscapes and ruggedness GIS maps generated for different periods of the animals’ active season. Results We observed dichotomous habitat use (grasslands versus upland forests) throughout most of the species’ northern range, reflected in different migratory movements of male snakes emanating from different hibernacula. Snakes utilizing higher-elevation forests moved further during the course of their annual migrations, and these snakes were more likely to use warmer areas of the landscape. Conclusion In addition to thermal benefits, advantages gained from selective migratory patterns may include prey availability and outbreeding. Testing these alternative hypotheses was beyond the scope of this study, and to collect the data to do so will require overcoming certain challenges. Still, insight into migratory differences between rattlesnake populations and the causal mechanism(s) of migrations will improve our ability to assess the implications of landscape change, management, and efficacy of conservation planning. Our findings suggest that such assessments may need to be tailored to individual dens and the migration strategies of their inhabitants. Additionally, local and landscape-scale migration patterns, as detected in this study, will have repercussions for snakes under climate-induced shifts in ecosystem boundaries and thermal regimes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".