The geomorphic work of the European mole (<scp><i>Talpa europaea</i></scp>): Long‐term monitoring of molehills using structure‐from‐motion photogrammetry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Moles—small insectivorous mammals of the family Talpidae—are widespread across the Northern Hemisphere. These subterranean mammals are easily detected through the mounds, or molehills, they construct as surface bioproducts of tunnel systems excavated underground. The dense aggregation of these bioconstructions in a range of environments (e.g., floodplains, woodland, coastal dunes and upland regions) indicates that moles may play an important role in sediment systems. However, compared with other fossorial mammals (e.g., gophers and rabbits), the impact of moles as direct and indirect biogeomorphic agents is poorly understood. Furthermore, little is known about how molehills develop and degrade over time or how long they persist as landscape features. By examining molehills created by the European mole (Talpa europaea) over 4 months on a floodplain in Oxfordshire, UK, we provide a quantitative assessment of how these landforms evolve over time and space. Through the creation of high‐resolution digital elevation models (DEMs) using structure‐from‐motion (SfM) photogrammetry, we derive a variety of metrics describing molehill morphology and produce a detailed record of how molehills change at weekly time intervals. In addition, measurements of molehill volume are used to estimate the excavation rate of moles over a month. Findings show that (i) molehills are dynamic landforms that change in size and shape in response to phases of construction, collapse, erosion and rebuilding; (ii) rates of degradation are influenced by soil characteristics and seasonal weather conditions; (iii) molehills can persist as landscape features for several months; and (iv) moles are capable of moving a substantial volume of sediment in highly active areas (3.89 m3 ha−1 month−1). Future work is now needed to determine the geomorphic impact of T. europaea over larger spatial scales (e.g., river catchments) and longer timescales (e.g., years–decades) to determine its importance in relation to other bioturbators and within the wider sediment system.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".