Investigating the feasibility of using scent detection dogs to locate bat hibernacula in a coastal temperate rainforest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little brown bat (Myotis lucifugus) populations have dramatically declined in North America as a result of white-nose syndrome, a fungal pathogen. The identification and protection of hibernacula is important to conservation efforts for the species. Little brown bats in western North America use a greater variety of hibernacula structures than their conspecifics in other portions of the continent, however relatively few have been identified. Existing techniques for locating hibernacula are limited and not conducive to all habitats; new methods are needed. The objectives of my research were to investigate whether a combination of scent detection dogs and game cameras at rocky outcrops could identify entrances to little brown bat hibernacula occurring in the Milieu Souterrain Superficiel (MSS) of Southeast Alaska during summer swarming. Additionally, I described swarming activity at swarming sites and hibernacula in Southeast Alaska to determine if specific behaviours during swarming were likely to be predictive of hibernation at that site. Using trained scent-detection dogs and game cameras, I identified six new hibernacula along ridges where bats were known to overwinter. Using cameras, I found that sites where bats were observed making u-turn behaviours were later used for hibernation, and that sites where circling and crawling behaviours were observed were less likely to be used as hibernacula. When bats were recorded at sites during the swarming period was also related to whether sites were used over winter; sites with more videos recorded during 26 August ̵ 8 September were more likely to be used as hibernacula. I conclude that it is possible to use scent detection dogs and game cameras at crevices during summer swarming to identify hibernacula in the MSS. Surveying with dogs will be most effective in areas with accessible habitat with recent bat use. A multipronged approach incorporating multiple tools, such as using radiotelemetry to broadly identify areas to search or using acoustic detectors to monitor bat activity levels prior to surveying, may increase the efficacy of the method.,
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".