MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4321183704 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2021-0140

Are riparian habitats always more diverse than nonriparian? A case study with small mammals in a rainforest environment

2023· article· en· W4321183704 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rodrigo Paulo da Cunha Araújo, Maron Galliez, Helena Godoy Bergallo

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRiparian zoneHabitatUnderstoryEcologyRainforestAbundance (ecology)Riparian forestBiologyAridCanopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Riparian environments are characterized by a gradient of environmental factors perpendicular to the watercourse, as the habitat changes from terrestrial to aquatic. These areas are highly diverse in comparison with adjacent ecosystems specially in arid and semi-arid regions, a pattern that may not be as marked in other climates where humidity and nutrient gradients are not so abrupt. We aimed to evaluate the diversity of small mammals in riparian and nonriparian environments in an area of Atlantic Forest, as well as the association between habitat structure and small mammal assemblages. A survey was conducted between October 2018 and August 2019 by sampling 17 plots—8 in riparian areas and 9 in nonriparian areas. No differences were found in composition and abundance of small mammals between riparian and nonriparian environments, because habitat structure did not differ between these environments. However, small mammal assemblages were structured by habitat characteristics such as understory obstruction, fallen trunks, and altitude. Water deficits are not marked throughout the year in the study area, therefore there is no such distinction between riparian and nonriparian environments. The most important habitat characteristics for the small mammals were those that represent shelter and resources’ sources.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicWildlife Ecology and Conservation→French-language works237,207→