Microtus (Mynomes) oregoni Bachman 1839
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Microtus (Mynomes) oregoni Bachman 1839 Microtus (Mynomes) oregoni Bachman 1839, J. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 8: 60. Type Locality: USA, Oregon, Clatsop Co., Astoria. Vernacular Names: Creeping Vole. Synonyms: Microtus (Mynomes) adocetus Merriam 1908; Microtus (Mynomes) bairdii Merriam 1897; Microtus (Mynomes) cantwelli Taylor 1920; Microtus (Mynomes) morosus Elliot 1899; Microtus (Mynomes) serpens Merriam 1897. Distribution: Moist coniferous forest seres of Pacific Northwest, from SW British Columbia, Canada, south to NW California, USA. Conservation: IUCN – Lower Risk (lc). Discussion: Subgenus Mynomes, sole member of oregoni species group (Zagorodnyuk, 1990). Type species of Chilotus, conventionally recognized as a subgenus of Microtus (see Anderson, 1959, 1960; Bailey, 1900), and occasionally including Old World M. socialis as a comember (Chaline, 1974; Ognev, 1964) or not (Anderson, 1959). Hooper and Hart (1962), however, found the morphological evidence insufficient to warrant subgeneric segregation of oregoni from North American species of Microtus, a viewpoint sustained by genetic distance comparisons (Moore and Janecek, 1990) and reflected in the classification of Zagorodnyuk (1990); sister species to M. longicaudus according to mitochondrial DNA sequence data (Conroy and Cook, 2000 a) or to the M. chrotorrhinus and M. pinetorum clade according to repetitive DNA fragments (Modi, 1996). Diploid number and sex-determining mechanism unique among North American Microtus studied (Ohno et al., 1963). See Carraway and Verts, 1985 (Mammalian Species, 233).
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".