MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415774687 · doi:10.1111/ele.70245

Sex Drives Intraspecific Scaling of Home Range Size in Mammals

2025· article· en· W4415774687 on OpenAlexaff
Aline Giroux, Denis Valle, Eliezer Gurarie, Marcus Vinícius Vieira, James D. Forester, Luca Börger, Raíssa Sepulvida, Nicole Barbour, Érika Garcez da Rocha, Júlia Emi de Faria Oshima, Fernanda Cavalcanti de Azevedo, Frederico Gemesio Lemos, Bernardo Brandão Niebuhr, Rogério de Paula, Caio F. M. Lima, Guilherme Mourão, Nina Attias, Marina Ochoa Favarini, Felipe Bortolotto Peters, Arnaud Léonard Jean Desbiez, María Luisa S. P. Jorge, Milton Cézar Ribeiro, Alexine Keuroghlian, Ísis Zanini das Candeias, Carlos André Zucco, Walfrido Moraes Tomás, Sandra M. C. Cavalcanti, Ermeson A. Vilalba, Vanessa V. Alberico, Marcos Adriano Tortato, Ricardo Luiz Pires Boulhosa, Flávia Fiori, Pedro Henrique de Faria Peres, Francisco Grotta‐Neto, Ubiratan Piovezan, José Maurício Barbanti Duarte, Luiz Gustavo Rodrigues Oliveira‐Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoInstituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia da CriosferaCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsIntraspecific competitionInterspecific competitionAllometryMammalRange (aeronautics)ScalingVariation (astronomy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding variation in home range size (HR) provides important insights into the underlying ecological processes driving space use. However, it remains unclear whether the interspecific allometric scaling of mammals' HR can also be consistently observed within species and for both sexes. To address this knowledge gap, we GPS-tracked 349 resident individuals across Brazil, encompassing 18 mammal species. We estimated individuals' HR and modelled intraspecific variation in HR against body mass (BM) and sex. While males showed a positive allometric scaling similar to interspecific findings reported in the literature (exponent = 1.23), females' BM had no statistically discernible relationship with HR. We suggest that males have greater energetic and evolutionary incentives to expand their HR with increasing BM, and more physical capacity to do so. Traditional studies on HR scaling that disregard individual sex may, in reality, reflect an average of two distinct patterns, while failing to accurately represent either one.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology LettersSame topicAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207