MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3198281139 · doi:10.1139/as-2021-0010

Long-term monitoring reveals topographical features and vegetation that explain winter habitat use of an Arctic rodent

2021· article· en· W3198281139 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xaver von Beckerath, Gita Benadi, Olivier Gilg, Benoît Sittler, Glenn Yannic, Alexandra‐Maria Klein, Bernhard Eitzinger

Bibliographic record

VenueArctic Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHabitatSnowSnowpackArcticEcologyVegetation (pathology)PopulationPhysical geographyVegetation coverGeographyEnvironmental scienceBiologyLand use

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The quality of wintering habitats, such as depth of snow cover, plays a key role in sustaining population dynamics of Arctic lemmings. However, few studies so far investigated habitat use during the Arctic winter. Here, we used a unique long-term time series to test whether lemmings are associated with topographical and vegetational habitat features for their wintering sites. We examined yearly numbers and distribution of 22 769 winter nests of the collared lemming Dicrostonyx groenlandicus (Traill, 1823) from an ongoing long-term research on Traill Island, Northeast Greenland, collected between 1989 and 2019, and correlated this information with data on dominant vegetation types, elevation, and slope. We found that the number of lemming nests was highest in areas with a high proportion of Dryas heath, but was also correlated with other vegetation types, suggesting some flexibility in resource use of wintering lemmings. Furthermore, lemmings showed a higher use for sloped terrain, probably as it enhances the formation of deep snow drifts, which increases the insulative characteristics of the snowpack and protection from predators. With global warming, prime lemming winter habitats may become scarce through alteration of snow physical properties, potentially resulting in negative consequence for the whole community of terrestrial vertebrates.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArctic ScienceSame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207