Breeding Biology and Seasonal Capture Success of Northern Flying Squirrels ('Claucomys sabrinus') and Red Squirrels ('Tamiasciurus hudsonicus') in Southern New Brunswick
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sciurids have been poorly studied in the Acadian forests of eastern North America, yet they represent common and ecologically important members of the forest community in the region. I gathered data on capture success and general life history traits of northern flying squirrels ('Glaucomys sabrinus') and red squirrels ('Tamiasciurus hudsonicus') in mature forest at Fundy National Park in southern New Brunswick, Canada. Squirrels were live- trapped over 14 sampling periods between 1999 and 2001. Flying squirrel capture success was considerably greater in summer and fall than in winter and spring, while red squirrels were caught more often in spring and summer than fall and winter. Capture success for both species was positively correlated with maximum daily temperature. Breeding seasons of both species began with male testes developing in winter and spring, followed by female pregnancy and lactation in late spring and summer. Flying squirrels may have also had an additional fall breeding season in the second year of the study. My data also suggest that 'G. sabrinus' is smaller in eastern North America compared with western North America, where most data pertaining to this species has been gathered. There was no sexual dimorphism apparent in either flying squirrels or red squirrels.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".