MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6968635815 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.6707450

Peromyscus leucopus

2017· article· en· W6968635815 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeromyscusSubspeciesPlumageDeciduousType locality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

258. White-footed Deermouse Peromyscus leucopus French: Péromyscus a pattes blanches / German: \Weil3ful3-Hirschmaus / Spanish: Ratén ciervo de pies blancos Other common names: \ White-footed Mouse Taxonomy. Musculus leucopus Rafinesque, 1818, type locality not given. Restricted by W. H. Osgood in 1909 to “mouth of the Ohio River,” Ballard County, Kentucky, USA. Peromyscus leucopus is in the leucopus species group. Seventeen subspecies recognized. Subspecies and Distribution. P.l.leucopusRafinseque,1818—SEUSA. P.l.affinis].A.Allen,1891—EOaxacaandSVeracruz,Mexico. P.l.ammodytesBangs,1905—knownonlyfromManomoyI,Massachusetts,USA. P.l.aridulusOsgood,1909—fromSESaskatchewanandSAlberta,Canada,StoNWKansas,USA.P.lLarizonae].A.Allen,1894—fromSEArizonaandSWNewMexico,USA,StoCDurango,Mexico. P.l.castaneusOsgood,1904—WYucatanPeninsula,Mexico. P.l.caudatusR.W.Smith,1939—SNovaScotia,Canada. P.l.cozumelaeMerriam,1901—CozumelI,Mexico. P.l.eastiParadiso,1960—knownonlyfromthetypelocalityandsurroundingareainSEVirginia,USA. P.l.fususBangs,1905—knownonlyfromMartha’sVineyardIandNantucketI,Massachusetts,USA. P.l.incensusGoldman,1942—fromWVeracruzSthroughPueblatoNOaxaca,Mexico. P.l.lachiguiriensisGoodwin,1956—knownonlyfromthetypelocalityandimmediatesurroundingareainSCOaxaca,Mexico. P.l.mesomelasOsgood,1904—fromextremeSESanLuisPotosiStoSVeracruz,Mexico. P.l.noveboracensis|].B.Fischer,1829—NEone-fourthofUSA. P.l.ochraceusOsgood,1909—CArizona,USA. P.l. texanus Woodhouse, 1853 — from NC Texas, USA, S to SE San Luis Potosi, Mexico. PL. tornillo Mearns, 1896 — from SE Colorado and SW Kansas S to W Texas, USA, and extreme N Chihuahua, Mexico. Descriptive notes. Head—body 85-105 mm, tail 45-100 mm, ear 13-16 mm, hindfoot 17-25 mm; weight 20-23 g. The White-footed Deermouse is small, with brown to cinnamon or gray dorsal pelage. Some subspecies have dark colored mid-dorsal line. Venter is whitish, with hairs having dark bases. Buffy pectoral spot may be present. Feet are white. Tail is slightly bicolored to uniform in color and generally equal to or shorter than head-body length. It is morphologically similar to the North American Deermouse (FP. maniculatus), and the two species often are difficult to discern. Habitat. Grasslands, old fields, mesquite grasslands, chaparral, thorn scrublands, riparian, pine forests, oak forests, secondary growth forests, tropical deciduous forests, and tropical perennial forests from sea level to elevations of ¢.3000 m. The White-footed Deermouse is found in mesic and arid regions and in temperate and tropical environments. In grasslands, there is generally some shrub or tree component. Food and Feeding. The White-footed Deermouse eats insects, seeds, and several types of green vegetation. Breeding. Litters of White-footed Deermice average 3-5-5 young, depending on region and time of year. Breeding can be strongly seasonal, with most reproduction in northern regions occurring in spring and late summer. In some regions, reproduction is year-round, with severallitters produced annually. Activity patterns. The White-footed Deermouse is nocturnal and semi-arboreal. It can enter torpor when temperatures drop below 3°C. Nests have been found aboveground; at ground level; under piles of rocks, tree stumps, and fallen trees; and in hollow trees. Nests are generally constructed with herbs, leaves, hair, seeds, feathers, shredded bark, and mosses. Movements, Home range and Social organization. In Hidalgo, Mexico, densities of up to 4-8 ind/ha were reported in xeric scrublands. Home ranges are 1155 m? for males and 459 m? for females. Status and Conservation. Classified as Least Concern on The IUCN Red Last. Bibliography. Batzli (1977), Baumgardner et al. (1980), Blair (1954), Burt (1940), Hall (1981), Hamilton (1941), Hamilton & Whitaker (1979), Judd et al. (1978), Lackey (1978), Lackey et al. (1985), McCarley (1963), Musser & Carleton (2005), Osgood (1909), Schug etal. (1991), Whitaker (1966).

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0550.021

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207