MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6913070441 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.6869749

Sorex navigator

2018· article· en· W6913070441 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubspeciesShrewSorexSubgenusDorsumWhite (mutation)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

78. Western Water Shrew Sorex navigator French: Musaraigne de Washington / German: Westliche Wasserspitzmaus / Spanish: Musgano occidental Taxonomy. Neosorex navigator Baird, 1858, “ Fort Vancouver, W. T. [= Washington Territory],” Washington, USA. Sorex navigator is in the S. palustris group and subgenus Ofisorex; it is sister to S. bendiru. It was previously included in S. palustris, although genetic and morphometric studies have justified its distinct status. There is apparent hybridization between it and S. palustris where their distributions meet in Alberta and British Columbia. Distribu- tional limits between the two species are uncertain, and additional studies are needed. Distributional limits between S. palustris and S. navigator are still very uncertain, and because of this, much of the ecological data cannot be reliably attributed to one species. Thus, all ecological data for S. albibarbis, S. navigator, and S. palustris are presented under S. palustris here. Two subspecies recognized. Subspecies and Distribution. S.n.navigatorBaird,1858—NorthAmericanCordilleraandWesternCoastalRegionsinSAlaska,WCanada,andWUSA;specificdistributionuncertain. S. n. brooksi R. M. Anderson, 1934 — Vancouver I (SW Canada). Descriptive notes. Head—body 56-85 mm, tail 62-79 mm, hindfoot 17-20-5 mm; weight 6-5-21-5 g. The Western Water Shrew is a large semi-aquatic shrew, very similar to the American Water Shrew (S. palustris), although it is smaller in size on average and has a longertail. Pelage is highly variable; dorsum is generally blackish brown and occasionally flecked with white, giving it grizzled appearance. Venteris silvery white to buffy brown. Occasionally, there is a nearly all blackish form, with lighter throat and chest, although this is rare. Feet are large and broad, and hindfeet are partially webbed and have small white hairs protruding on their sides. Tail is long, somewhat laterally flattened, and bicolored, being dark blackish brown above and lighter below, with small tip of fur at end. Skull has relatively longer unicuspid toothrow, smaller first unicuspid, and longer rostrum compared with the American Water Shrew. Teeth are pigmented dark red. There are five unicuspids, third is smaller than fourth, and fifth is much smaller. Habitat. Around streams, ponds, lakes, swamps, marshes, and bogs. Western Water Shrews are most common around small, fast-moving streams surrounded by dense overhanging riparian vegetation and rocks. Although they are most commonly associated with water, individuals have been captured far from water sources, which probably represents dispersing individuals. Food and Feeding. Diets of Western Water Shrews are probably similar to those of the American Water Shrew. Breeding. Reproduction of the Western Water Shrew is probably similar to that of the American Water Shrew. Activity patterns. Western Water Shrews are semi-aquatic, with activity patterns probably similar to those of the American Water Shrew. Movements, Home range and Social organization. The Western Water Shrew is probably similar to the American Water Shrew. Status and Conservation. Not assessed on The IUCN Red List. The Western Water Shrew is common and widespread, butit is threatened by localized habitat destruction and water pollution. Bibliography. Beneski & Stinson (1987), Brown (1967), Catania (2006), Conaway (1952), Conaway & Pfitzer (1952), Cook et al. (1997), Craig et al. (2001), Gusztak & Campbell (2004), Himes & Kenagy (2010), Hope et al. (2014), Mycroft et al. (2011), Nagorsen et al. (2017), Sorenson (1962).

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1440.072

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicAmphibian and Reptile Biology→French-language works237,207→