Data set to accompany manuscript "Seasonal plasticity in the thermal sensitivity of metabolism but not water loss in a fossorial ectotherm"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ectotherms from highly seasonal habitats should have enhanced potential for physiological plasticity to cope with climatic variability. However, whether this pattern is applicable to fossorial ectotherms, who are potentially buffered from thermal variability, is still unclear. Here, we evaluated how seasonal acclimatisation (spring vs. autumn) affected the thermal sensitivity of standard metabolic rates (SMR), rates of evaporative water loss (EWL), and skin resistance to water loss (Rs) in the Spotted Salamander (Ambystoma maculatum). We hypothesised that temperature would have both short- and long-term effects over traits (i.e., acute exposure to test temperatures and seasonal acclimatisation, respectively). After accounting for body mass and sex, we found that short-term changes in temperature led to an increase in SMR, EWL, and Rs. Additionally, SMR and Rs differed between seasons, but EWL did not. Sustaining low SMR and high Rs in the spring may allow salamanders to allocate energy toward overwintering emergence and breeding while simultaneously maximising water conservation. By contrast, maintaining high SMR and low Rs in the autumn may allow salamanders to forage aboveground on rainy nights to replenish energy reserves in preparation for the winter. Despite the common assumption that fossorial ectotherms are buffered from thermal effects, our study shows that functional differences between seasons (i.e., breeding in the spring and provisioning in the autumn) are accompanied by seasonal changes in energetic and hydroregulatory requirements.
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 | 0.004 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.646 | 0.247 |
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".