Phenology, population size, and factors influencing variation in density of an endangered butterfly, the mottled duskywing Erynnis martialis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the natural history and ecology of endangered species is critical for developing effective, evidence-based conservation and management plans. The mottled duskywingErynnismartialisis a skipper butterfly inhabiting oak savanna, oak woodlands, alvars, and tallgrass prairie habitats containing their host plants,Ceanothusspp. Listed as endangered in Canada, few populations persist in Ontario and Manitoba, but there are no formal estimates of population size or what influences spatial variation in adult density, and we have limited knowledge of phenology. To address these knowledge gaps, we conducted spatially explicit mark-re-sighting over multiple years at 2 of the largest known populations in Ontario (specific locations withheld). Population sizes at Site A were estimated to be 1159 individuals (confidence limit [CL] = 845-1598) in 2021 and at Site B, 626 individuals (CL = 466-851) in 2020 and 2227 individuals (CL = 1110-4463) in 2021. Most (81%) re-sightings occurred within 5 d of marking, suggesting that adults likely live less than 1 wk. High densities of adults were generally associated with highCeanothusspp. abundance and open canopy, but relationships varied by site and year. Peak flight across sites and years ranged from 5-13 June. We recommend that existing and prospective habitat managers prevent succession with brush-cutting and/or prescribed burns, specifically in areas of abundantCeanothusspp. This work provides valuable information for future management and recovery efforts, including planned translocations to both historically occupied and newly restored sites.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".