MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7031465425

Muskrats

2018· article· en· W7031465425 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLincoln (University of Nebraska) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and biodiversity studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionTSG101ExclosureHyporeflexiaGestational periodArticular cartilage damage
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) is a common, semi-aquatic rodent native to the United States (Figure 1). It spends its life in aquatic habitats and is well adapted for swimming. Although muskrats are an important part of native ecosystems, their burrowing and foraging activities can damage agricultural crops, native marshes and water control systems, such as aquaculture and farm ponds and levees. Such damage can significantly impact agricultural crops like rice that rely on consistent water levels for growth. Muskrats also cause damage by eating agricultural crops, other vegetation, and crayfish, mussels and other aquaculture products. Loss of vegetation from muskrat foraging can impact marsh viability and habitats for other species, including waterfowl. Habitat restoration often takes years, negatively impacting fish and wildlife. Economic losses due to muskrat damage in Arkansas, California, Louisiana and Mississippi likely exceed most other states combined, primarily because of the vast amounts of productive marshlands and types of crops (i.e., rice, fish, crayfish and vegetable crops) grown in those states. The 16 subspecies of Ondatra muskrats in North America are widely distributed (Figure 6). They are found from northern Mexico to northern Alaska, and most of northern Canada. The round-tailed muskrat is found primarily in Florida and parts of southern Georgia. Muskrats are not commonly found in dryer, desert type habitats.

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)0.001
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 score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1360.064

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.157 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLincoln (University of Nebraska)Same topicEcology and biodiversity studiesFrench-language works237,207