Exploration and docility in coexisting rodents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract There is increasing interest in understanding how behaviour influences trade-offs that facilitate species coexistence. In the absence of spatiotemporal habitat separation and resource partitioning, behavioural differences mediate competition among sympatric species. Here, we examine two behaviours, docility and exploration, using two standardized assays in three rodent species that coexist in Algonquin Provincial Park, Ontario, Canada, as part of an ongoing mark–recapture project. We used reproductive status as a proxy for energetic costs during a single breeding season, hypothesizing that differences in docility and exploration reflect species-specific reproductive life-history traits. We predicted that behavioural differences would be most notable between breeding and non-breeding individuals. We report mean differences in behavioural traits for deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus), which are more explorative and less docile than red-backed voles (Clethrionomys gapperi) or woodland jumping mice (Napaeozapus insignis). We also report low among-individual variation in both behaviours across species. The populations observed in this study are known to be dependent on similar resources. Behaviour is an important, yet underexplored, mechanism of coexistence in the face of limiting resources. Here, we demonstrate that differences in exploration and docility are related to species reproductive life history. Thus, reproductive history traits and seasonal or annual changes in behaviours can be an important consideration for understanding the mechanisms that facilitate species coexistence.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".