MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200154085 · doi:10.3390/ani11123477

The Use of Intrinsic Markers for Studying the Migratory Movements of Bats

2021· article· en· W4200154085 on OpenAlexafffund
Caralie T. Brewer, William A. Rauch-Davis, Erin E. Fraser

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimals · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeographyEvolutionary biologyBiologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mortality of migratory bat species at wind energy facilities is a well-documented phenomenon, and mitigation and management are partially constrained by the current limited knowledge of bat migratory movements. Analyses of biochemical signatures in bat tissues ("intrinsic markers") can provide information about the migratory origins of individual bats. Many tissue samples for intrinsic marker analysis may be collected from living and dead bats, including carcasses collected at wind energy facilities. In this paper, we review the full suite of available intrinsic marker analysis techniques that may be used to study bat migration, with the goal of summarizing the current literature and highlighting knowledge gaps and opportunities. We discuss applications of the stable isotopes of hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, carbon, sulfur; radiogenic strontium isotopes; trace elements and contaminants; and the combination of these markers with each other and with other extrinsic markers. We further discuss the tissue types that may be analyzed for each and provide a synthesis of the generalized workflow required to link bats to origins using intrinsic markers. While stable hydrogen isotope techniques have clearly been the leading approach to infer migratory bat movement patterns across the landscape, here we emphasize a variety of lesser used intrinsic markers (i.e., strontium, trace elements, contaminants) that may address new study areas or answer novel research questions.

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 score0.300
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.159 · 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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimalsSame topicBat Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207