Sorex maritimensis R. W. Smith 1939
Bibliographic record
Abstract
27. Maritime Shrew Sorex maritimensis French: Musaraigne des Maritimes / German: Nova-Scotia-Spitzmaus / Spanish: Musarana maritima Taxonomy. Sorex arcticus maritimensis R. W. Smith, 1939, “ Wolfville, Kings County, Nova Scotia,” Canada. Sorex maritimensis is currently included in the arcticus group in the subgenus Sorex with S. arcticus, of which it was originally included as a subspecies. Sorex arcticus and S. maritimensis might have had a common ancestor c.2-4 million years ago. Monotypic. Distribution. New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, SE Canada. Descriptive notes. Head-body 60-72 mm, tail 37-42 mm, ear 7-8 mm, hindfoot 13-14 mm; weight 7-8 g. The Maritime Shrew is medium-sized. Pelage is tricolored, with dark brown back, yellowish brown sides, and yellowish gray venter; dorsum,sides, and venter are sharply demarcated from each other. Feet are dark; ears are short and barely extend past fur. Tail is ¢.60% of head-body length and indistinctly bicolored, being dark brown above and lighter below. Tooth ridges (except on unicuspids as in other members of the subgenus Sorex) are pigmented dark red, and there are five unicuspids gradually getting smaller from first to fifth, which is significantly smaller than the fourth. The Maritime Shrew has smaller and flatter skull, less tapered rostrum, and more noticeably arched maxillary tooth row than in the Arctic Shrew (S. arcticus). Chromosomal complement has 2n = 28 (females) or 29 (males) and FN = 34. Habitat. Edges of freshwater swamps and marshes overgrown with tangles of grasses and rushes. Food and Feeding. No information. Breeding. No information. Activity patterns. No information. Movements, Home range and Social organization. No information. Status and Conservation. Classified as Least Concern on The IUCN Red List. The Maritime Shrew is poorly known, is considered rare, and has a relatively fragmented and small distribution that is vulnerable to changes caused from global warming (e.g. increased flooding). Bibliography. Perry et al. (2004), Smith (1939), Stewart et al. (2002), Volobouev & van Zyll de Jong (1988), van Zyll de Jong (1983).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.067 | 0.017 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".