Do differences in exploration and boldness inform species level responses to environmental change in montane chipmunks?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How animals behave in novel situations may significantly affect multiple aspects of their biology, including how they respond to environmental change. Two aspects of behaviour that are often used to assess interactions with new environments are exploration and boldness. Within species, variation in these responses to novelty is thought to reflect differences in individual behavioural phenotypes (e.g. behavioural syndromes). Between species, these responses may be influenced by the degree of ecological specialization, with members of more specialized taxa typically expected to display a reduced tendency to interact with novel habitats. To test the prediction that more ecologically specialized species are more neophobic, we used open-field assays to compare exploratory behaviour and boldness among free-living members of two partially sympatric species of chipmunks from the Sierra Nevada Mountains of California, U.S.A.: the lodgepole chipmunk, Tamias speciosus , a habitat generalist, and the alpine chipmunk, Tamias alpinus , a habitat specialist. Our analyses indicate that while behavioural measures of boldness did not differ between these species, individual T. speciosus were on average more exploratory than individual T. alpinus . Although the number of individuals tested per species was limited, these findings have important implications for understanding reported interspecific differences in elevational range shifts in response to changing environmental conditions in the Sierra Nevada. More generally, our analyses underscore the potential importance of behavioural responses to novelty in shaping species level patterns of response to environmental change.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".