MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Patterns of body mass senescence and selective disappearance differ among three species of free-living ungulates

2016· other· en· W6977067635 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth, Education, and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUngulateSenescenceOvis canadensisReproductionRoe deerBovidaePopulationAgeing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Declines in survival and reproduction with age are prevalent in wild vertebrates, but we know little about longitudinal changes in behavioral, morphological, or physiological variables that may explain these demographic declines. We compared age-related variation in body mass of adult females in three free-living ungulate populations that have been the focus of long-term, individual-based research: bighorn sheep (<i>Ovis canadensis</i>) at Ram Mountain, Canada; roe deer (<i>Capreolus capreolus</i>) at Trois Fontaines, France; and Soay sheep (<i>Ovis aries</i>) on St. Kilda, Scotland. We use two recently proposed approaches to separate contributions to age-dependent variation at the population level from within-individual changes and between-individual selective disappearance. Selective disappearance of light individuals in all three populations was most evident at the youngest and oldest ages. In later adulthood, bighorn sheep and roe deer showed a continuous decline in body mass that accelerated with age while Soay sheep showed a precipitous decrease in mass in the two years preceding death. Our results highlight the importance of mass loss in explaining within-individual demographic declines in later adulthood in natural populations. They also reveal that the pattern of senescence, and potentially also the processes underlying demographic declines in late life, can differ markedly across related species with similar life histories.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.515
Threshold uncertainty score0.974

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0550.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicHealth, Education, and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207