Body temperature, heart rate, and activity patterns of two boreal homeotherms in winter: Homeostasis, allostasis, and ecological coexistence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Organisms survive environmental variation by combining homeostatic regulation of critical states with allostatic variation of other traits, and species differences in these responses can contribute to coexistence in temporally variable environments. In this paper, we simultaneously record variation in three functional traits—body temperature (Tb), heart rate and activity—in relation to three forms of environmental variation—air temperature (Ta), photoperiod and experimentally manipulated resource levels—in free‐ranging snowshoe hares and North American red squirrels to characterize distinctions in homeotherm responses to the extreme conditions of northern boreal winters. Hares and squirrels differed in the level and precision ofTbregulation, but also in the allostatic pathways necessary to maintain thermal homeostasis. Hares demonstrated a stronger metabolic pathway (through heart rate variation reflective of the thermogenesis), while squirrels demonstrated a stronger behavioural pathway (through activity variation that minimizes cold exposure). As intermediate‐sized, winter‐active homeotherms, hares and squirrels share many functional attributes, yet, through the integrated monitoring of multiple functional traits in response to shared environmental variation, our study reveals many pairwise species differences in homeostatic and allostatic traits, that both define and are defined by the natural history, functional niches and coexistence of sympatric species. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".