Metabolic rate and thermal conductance of lemmings from high-arctic Canada and Siberia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The arctic climate places high demands on the energy metabolism of its inhabitants. We measured resting (RMR) and basal metabolic rates (BMR), body temperatures, and dry and wet thermal conductances in summer morphs of the lemmings Dicrostonyx groenlandicus and Lemmus trimucronatus in arctic Canada, and the BMR of D. torquatus, D. groenlandicus, L. sibiricus, L. bungei and L. trimucronatus in Siberia. In contrast to previous studies the data were collected on animals that had spent only a limited time in captivity. All parameters were analysed in relation to the variations in body mass (20-90 g). Body temperature and BMR were lower in D. groenlandicus than L. trimucronatus, which coincides with greater longevity in the former species. Wet and dry thermal conductances of both species were similar and comparable with those of other Myomorpha (mouse-type rodents), indicating no evidence for a previously claimed lower thermal conductance in lemmings. BMR in lemmings appeared to be higher than in other Arvicolidae (voles, lemmings and muskrats), which could relate to their typically high-latitude distribution. However, the more southerly living Lemmus species had higher BMR than the more northerly living Dicrostonyx species, which may be explained by the former having a relatively low-quality diet.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".