MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7010033170

A genetic and behavioral analysis of intraspecific variation in mating behavior of deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus)

2007· other· en· W7010033170 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro) · 2007
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMatingIntraspecific competitionPopulationMating systemMate choiceSeasonal breederRange (aeronautics)Animal sexual behaviourVariation (astronomy)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"Several studies have examined individual mating behaviors of wild peromyscine rodents. Many of these studies were short term and were limited to a single population in a single breeding season, so it is not clear to what extent mating behaviors vary within these populations over time. Therefore, I assessed mating behavior over four years (2003-2006) in short season populations of deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus) from the Kananaskis Valley in Alberta Canada. In addition, I examined variation in home range size, home range overlap, and frequency of multiple mating within populations over time with respect to population density. I found that spatial behaviors varied over time but patterns of genetic mates did not. Behavioral changes did not correlate with changes in population density. My results suggest that male and female spatial behaviors and patterns of genetic mates may be more influenced by resource availability and mate choice than mate availability."--Abstract from author supplied metadata.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro)→Same topicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction→French-language works237,207→