Replication Data for: Handle with care: the thermal consequences of short-term handling in mole salamanders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurately measuring body temperature is critical for understanding how ectotherms interact with their thermal environment. In amphibians, traditional methods like cloacal thermometry often require restraint, potentially altering body temperature through stress and heat transfer from human hands. Here, we used infrared thermography to examine how short-term handling (2 min) impacted skin temperatures (Tskin) in two species of mole salamanders (Ambystoma laterale and A. maculatum) by combining field and lab experiments. We randomly assigned salamanders to a handled or control group (field), and a heating plate set to hand temperature or a control group (lab). We also scored salamander activity (active vs. inactive) in both settings. In the field, handling increased Tskin in both species, with the head warming up more than the dorsum. Moreover, A. laterale experienced an overall greater magnitude of thermal change (Delta Tskin) than A. maculatum due to body size differences. In the lab, contact with the heating plate increased Tskin, with head Tskin being consistently warmer than dorsal Tskin. We also found that Delta Tskin was greater for the handled than the heating plate group (Delta Tskin = 4.86 ± 1.21ºC vs. 1.72 ± 0.70ºC, respectively), suggesting that handling stress may amplify thermal responses. Warmer salamanders were also more prone to be active regardless of whether they were handled or in contact with a heating plate. Our results demonstrate that short-term handling can cause rapid warming that exceeds rates used in heat stress studies, with implications for data reliability and amphibian welfare.
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 | 0.008 | 0.050 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.134 | 0.031 |
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".