Franklin’s ground squirrel (Poliocitellus franklinii) social distancing: home range size and overlap of a relatively asocial ground squirrel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sociality among the ground-dwelling squirrels has been well researched via studies exploring life history traits, the formation of groups and how cooperation contributes to the success of these social species. The evaluation of socio-spatial organization, and in particular, kin-differential associations among individuals, can provide insight into the adaptive basis of coloniality and altruism among conspecifics. Relatively asocial Franklin’s ground squirrels (Poliocitellus franklinii) discriminate kin from non-kin in the absence of any broader level of social discrimination, which, based on comparative analyses, may be ancestral to more advanced and inclusive expressions of sociality. In populations of Franklin’s ground squirrels near Delta Marsh, Manitoba, Canada, spatial data were gathered to monitor home range and core area size and overlap across the annual reproductive cycle (gestation, lactation and post-weaning) of adult and yearling males and females both with close-kin (defined as known mother-offspring pairs or sibling pairs) and non-close-kin. Nest locations of lactating females were documented as well to test for differences in dispersion and relocation patterns among close- versus non-close-kin. Sex, age and kinship did not affect home range and core area size, which varied extensively across the different stages of the annual reproductive cycle. The degree of home range and core area overlap throughout the overall active season was not significantly affected by sex, age or kinship. Further, lactating females did not cluster nests with close-kin during lactation, and tended to move nests away from close-kin as lactation progressed. Taken together, the absence of preferential association with kin in above-ground space use and nest dispersion suggest that space use of Franklin’s ground squirrels is not predicated on kinship. These findings also suggest that members of this Franklin’s ground squirrel population are relatively asocial based on limited overlap within the 50% core area among conspecifics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".