MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7062026490

Snail trails: Use of RFID technology to discover how far intertidal snails travel and where they live

2016· article· en· W7062026490 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Power Generation Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntertidal zoneSnailGastropodaNucellaHabitatIntertidal ecology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mark and recapture (MR) is a common technique used to study animal behaviour, however, conventional tagging methods involving direct observation have difficulties in locating small, cryptic animals in complex environments. Radio frequency identification (RFID) technology can solve this problem, to offer a promising advantage in the intertidal zone. This project represents the first use of RFID technology to discover which habitats snails use throughout the summer, how far throughout the intertidal zone they move per day, and how widely they disperse towards other populations. When mounted to snails, RFID technology, which uses small passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags, allows a researcher to detect individual snails even when they are hidden from view. The specific goals of this study were to determine: 1) the effectiveness of using RFID to study snail behaviour, 2) which microhabitats were used most often by the snails, 3) how far the snails travelled each day, and 4) how far the snails dispersed over the summer. This research was conducted on the intertidal snail, Nucella ostrina, near the Bamfield Marine Sciences Center, in British Columbia, Canada. In summer 2015, I attached one 12 mm PIT tag to each of 64 snails and located their position in the intertidal zone daily using an RFID reader. PIT tags had no detectable effect on snail movement or survival; thus, using RFID technology is an effective technique for tagging snails to study their behavior. Intertidal snails occupied a variety of hidden microhabitats throughout the study, which made 30% of them invisible to the human eye without the use of RFID technology. In addition, intertidal snails moved very little each day (13.82 ± 7.01 cm) and moved non-directionally, which led to limited displacement over the study period where majority of snails (78%) only dispersed up to 1 m from their starting position. Consequently, snail populations may have limited gene flow between neighboring populations.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.171 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network)Same topicAdvanced Power Generation TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207