Geographic Variation In The Morphometrics Of Emydoide blandingii
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Morphometric measurements were taken from museum specimens Emydoidea blandingii. Samples were taken from Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, New York and Minnesota as well as from Ontario, Canada. Populations of this species have become increasingly fragmented and isolated during the past century due primarily to the urbanization of North America which has included increased road related fatalities and habitat destruction. An examination of physical characteristics was conducted to determine if morphometric analysis could indicate differences among the various populations. Twenty-eight measurements were made and compared to detect physical distinctions between populations. Individuals were then classified geographically based on east (C), west (A), or central (B) emanations from the Great Lakes. Analysis revealed significant distinctions in nuchal width and length indicating that these characteristics are independent of size. Jackknife classification hinted ata discrete relationship peripheral groups A and C suggesting a longitudinal clinal relationship in the population. Regression analysis did not support this finding however, but did show indication of a latitudinal relationship in concordance with Bergmann's Rule of increasing body size with increasing latitude as modified by Ashton and Feldman (2003) to include Chelonians.
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) | 0.002 | 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".