Western Rattlesnake (<i>Crotalus oreganus</i>) spring migration in British Columbia: a comparative study of juveniles and adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In many species, the spatial ecology of early age classes can differ significantly from adults. Adult Western Rattlesnakes ( Crotalus oreganus Holbrook, 1840) at the northern extent of their range undertake small-scale but important seasonal migrations between communal hibernacula and summer foraging and mating grounds. Mature snakes also show annual fidelity to their migratory paths, providing a useful system to examine the development of migratory behaviour. We examined and compared spring outbound migratory movements of juveniles and adults at a site in southern British Columbia, Canada, using radiotelemetry data collected between 2011 and 2016 (adult snakes) and in 2021 (juvenile snakes). We found that compared with adult rattlesnakes, juveniles displayed similar directional orientation, direction of vertical migration, and path sinuosity, but initiated spring migrations later and exhibited shorter movements in terms of distances and rates. For example, juvenile straight-line migration distance (262 ± 90 m) was significantly shorter than that for adults (1069 ± 134 m; P < 0.001). We provide a starting point in attempting to understand an important question in migration—how individuals early on in their lives adopt different tactics—while contributing to our growing understanding of the complexity of patterns and variation in the movement ecology of a far-ranging snake.
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 | 0.001 | 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".