Age and size of Wood Frogs, Rana sylvatica, from Kuujjuarapik, northern Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
sylvatica, from Kuujjuarapik, northern Quebec.Canadian Field-Naturalist 114(3): 381-387.Length and age of 53 Wood Frogs, Rana sylvatica, from Kuujjuarapik in northern Quebec (55°17'N) were compared with similar data from populations in more southern latitudes.Age was estimated by skeletochronology.Mean snout-urostyle length and age were 47.1 mm and 6.1 years in adult males (n = 41) and 50.9 mm and 7.7 years in adult females (n = 8).There was no significant correlation between age and size.The youngest mature males and females were 4 and 6 years old respectively.Mean physiological longevity (mean age in years multiplied by annual number of frost-free days) was 397 days for males and 504 days for females.Comparisons with other populations suggest that sexual dimorphism in size, age, and longevity are species characteristics.Size and age increase with latitude in lowland populations.Physiological longevity is positively related to body size in males from lowland and upland populations.The data do not support the hypothesis that maturity at an early age in males curtails their potential life span.They are consistent with the prediction of longer life span at lower ambient temperatures.In female Wood Frogs, physiological longevity does not follow geographical variation in adult body size.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".