MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388272351 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2023-0099

How do latitude and urban heat islands affect larval melanization in monarch butterflies (<i>Danaus plexippus</i>) ?

2023· article· en· W4388272351 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Madeline Schuster, Rosalind L. Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto Mississauga
KeywordsDanausMonarch butterflyBiologyOverwinteringEcologyLarvaClimate changeLatitudeThermoregulationLepidoptera genitaliaGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As temperatures warm in response to anthropogenic changes (climate change and urbanization), animals must respond adaptively to these changes or be displaced. Here, we use community science data (iNaturalist and BugGuide) to show that melanization in larval monarch butterflies ( Danaus plexippus (Linnaeus, 1758), an endangered species in Canada) is correlated with latitude and temperature across a latitudinal gradient, indicating likely use in thermoregulation. We also predicted that melanization would decrease in cities where temperatures are consistently higher than rural areas; however, we found that while melanization was lower in urban areas, it was not statistically significant. Our results demonstrate the importance of considering life stage when assessing capacity for adaptation to anthropogenic change in vulnerable animal populations, like monarch butterflies. We also show the value of using community science to sample species (particular those of most concern) distributions across the landscape.

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)0.000
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 score0.169
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change→French-language works237,207→