Bibliographic record
Abstract
File List PopulationAbunMark-Recap.csv (MD5: 70a47c25ad7f7dc317474c883bf9dc18) PopulationAbunTransect.csv (MD5: e07c022497c4e70e2d4e86abf79b8083) Dispersal.csv (MD5: d425332598dd2cc8e3adb9f6513c9b47) Landscape.csv (MD5: b3712322e4d1c5347171cd1c2a36198f) Description Spatial population networks (metapopulations sensu lato) have distinct properties from isolated populations. Within a population network, the abundance, persistence, and dynamics of local populations are affected by other populations within the network. Similarly, the abundance of local populations within the network has a strong effect on the dynamics and persistence of the entire network. In this data paper, we present 10 years (1995–2004) of local population abundance and seven years of dispersal data within a spatial population network consisting of 21 local populations of the Rocky Mountain Apollo butterfly, Parnassius smintheus. Populations were located within alpine meadows above treeline (≈2100 m) along Lusk (51.01°N, 114.97°W) and Jumpingpound Ridges (50.95°N, 114.91°W) in the front ranges of the Rocky Mountains in Alberta, Canada. Mark–recapture methods were used to monitor all populations in 1995 and 1996, and most populations in 1997 and from 2001–2004. For these years, abundance was estimated using Craig’s method. In other years, population size was estimated via Pollard transects and converted to a common estimate of abundance based on a statistical relationship between transect counts and Craig’s estimate. We present multiple estimates of abundance for most populations over the adult flight season each year, and the observed number of emigrants and immigrants over the flight season for populations in years where mark–recapture was conducted. These data should be useful in synthetic studies of factors affecting local population abundance within spatial population networks, landscape genetics, spatial population dynamics, and the persistence of spatial population networks. <i>Key words</i>: <i>colonization; density; dispersal; extinction; fragmentation; landscape; Lepidoptera; metapopulation; migration; patch; population dynamics; recolonization.</i>
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.743 | 0.011 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".