MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416736568 · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.128095

Artificial snake hibernacula provide suitable microclimate but are not immediately adopted

2025· article· en· W4416736568 on OpenAlexafffund
Veronica M.L. McKelvey, Lily Ragsdale, Leigh Anne Isaac, Karl W. Larsen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsMinistry of EnvironmentThompson Rivers University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsThompson Rivers University
KeywordsMicroclimateHibernation (computing)OverwinteringHabitatStructural basinHumidity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial snake hibernacula (ASHs) are an increasingly popular tool to replace lost habitat. However, no published work has compared the overwinter thermal characteristics of these constructs with those experienced by snakes in nearby natural hibernacula. Following a disturbance, we used the establishment of two ASHs to evaluate the structures’ ability to buffer external conditions, match the thermal needs of Great Basin Gophersnakes ( Pituophis catenifer deserticola ), and monitor adoption in the main hibernaculum by the original cohort of displaced snakes and broader community (gophersnakes, Western Yellow-bellied Racers ( Coluber constrictor mormon ), and Western Rattlesnakes ( Crotalus oreganus oreganus )). Microclimate loggers inside the ASHs showed the structures buffered against external temperature and humidity conditions. Snowfall did not influence the internal temperatures. Surgically-implanted transmitters indicated the body temperatures of hibernating gophersnakes within the main artificial hibernaculum were comparable to those using natural hibernacula. The ASHs provided thermal microsites that mirrored gophersnake hibernation patterns at depths of 2.6–3.1 m. Despite extensive mitigation, only six of 93 displaced snakes were found to have overwintered in the main artificial hibernaculum in the first year, and none were found to have returned two years post-disturbance (though two newly identified snakes overwintered in the second year). We conclude that ASHs can be built conducive to snake survival, but future designs should consider species-specific and locational requirements. Temperature profiles should be collected from all ASHs to assess their viability in varied and extreme environments. We caution against routine use of this mitigation tool without additional research assessing the long-term adoption. • Artificial snake hibernacula can buffer against external environmental conditions. • Artificial snake hibernacula can create microclimates that support snake survival. • Displaced snakes did not adopt the main artificial hibernaculum after 2 years. • Caution against building artificial hibernacula without research on long-term use. • Tailor construction to the microclimatic needs of the focal snake species.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Management→Same topicAmphibian and Reptile Biology→French-language works237,207→