Consumption of spiders by the little brown bat (<i>Myotis lucifugus</i>) and the long-eared myotis (<i>Myotis evotis</i>) in the Rocky Mountains of Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intraspecific variation in diet and (or) foraging behaviour is one way in which species are able to occupy wide geographical areas with variable environments. The little brown bat (Myotis lucifugus (Le Conte, 1831)), a primarily aerial insectivorous bat, consumes spiders in low temperatures at the start and end of summer in Northwest Territories, Canada, but it consumes spiders all summer, even during high aerial insect abundance, in Alaska, USA. There are no competitors of M. lucifugus in Alaska, but there are in Northwest Territories, suggesting that aerial insect abundance and competition from gleaning bats influences when M. lucifugus consumes spiders. In the Kananaskis area of the Rocky Mountains of Alberta, Canada, we investigated spider consumption by M. lucifugus and the long-eared myotis (Myotis evotis (H. Allen, 1864)), a species more adept at gleaning, to better understand when bats consume spiders. Fecal sample analysis indicated that M. evotis consumed spiders all season long, with greater consumption when the bats were caught near water. Myotis lucifugus did not consume spiders at all. This suggests that M. lucifugus opportunistically consumes spiders when encountered, but does not encounter them in Kananaskis where it forages primarily over open water, unlike in Northwest Territories where it forages in the interior of forests and may encounter spiders more frequently.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".