Microhabitat of <i>Myotis leibii</i> summer roosts at the southwestern periphery of their range
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding microhabitat use is needed to make sound conservation decisions for at-risk, patchy-habitat specialists, such as rock-habitat specialists. Rock habitats offer unique microclimatic refugia for reptiles and mammals. Eastern small-footed bats ( Myotis leibii (Audubon and Bachman, 1842)) use rock roosts during the summer, but data on these summer roosts are lacking for this species classified as (critically) imperiled in several US states and Canadian provinces and globally endangered. Our goal was to characterize the structure and microclimate of Myotis leibii roosts at the southwestern periphery of their range. We predicted that Myotis leibii roost temperatures would be warmer and less variable than ambient temperatures and that solitary bats would use horizontal roosts cooler at night, whereas maternity group roosts would be vertical and warmer at night. During summers of 2019 and 2020, we recorded physical (e.g., width) and temperature attributes of 58 Myotis leibii roosts at 16 sites in the Ouachita Mountains. Crevice roosts of Myotis leibii had narrow dimensions like elsewhere in their range and roost temperatures (measured with iButtons) were warmer and more variable than ambient temperatures. Group roosts were larger and had more stable temperatures than solitary roosts. These findings may be useful for assessing population threats, monitoring roost suitability, identifying roost-rich areas that need protection, and even planning artificial roost structures where natural roosts are limited.
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 | 0.000 | 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".