Phenotypic plasticity in reproductive and somatic efforts of female Columbian ground squirrels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phenotypic plasticity of life-history traits is well known among vertebrate species. We estimated reproductive and somatic efforts of female Columbian ground squirrels ( Urocitellus columbianus (Ord, 1815)) to test for plasticity of these important resource allocations. We examined a 27-year dataset of life-history traits on these long-living (8–10 years), hibernating, montane-living mammals. Environmental variation was estimated from two important traits of mothers, their relative timing of breeding and spring maternal body mass (initial “capital” for use in subsequent reproduction). Results from 183 known-aged mothers and 508 litters revealed considerable variation in the relative timing of breeding, initial maternal mass, and reproductive and somatic efforts, as well as significant variation among ages and years. Results from 125 mothers that reproduced more than once (and 450 litters) revealed significant plasticity of reproductive and somatic efforts with respect to relative timing of breeding and spring maternal mass. A within-subject centering statistical approach showed that phenotypically plastic reproductive and somatic efforts were due to variation within individuals, but were not always reflected by the pattern of responses among individuals in the population. The plastic responses of different mothers appeared to be similar in strength.
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 | 0.001 | 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".