Geographic variation in the echolocation calls of the hoary bat ( Lasiurus cinereus)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Use of bat detectors to perform inventories, determine activity, and assess differential use of habitats has become a generally accepted method. However, there has been vigorous disagreement as to the level of efficacy, primarily relating to the ability to distinguish certain species and groups of species. The primary explanation suggested for the inability to identify certain species is due to the magnitude of intraspecific variation resulting in overlap among species, presumably compounded by geographic variation. Lasiurus cinereus has been identified as exhibiting the greatest degree of geographic variation including recent findings of distinct variation between populations in Hawaii and Manitoba. We find that claims of geographic variation have not been proven because of small sample size and lack of adequate description of method, including the behavior of the bat and the context during which bats were recorded. Previous geographical comparisons of species have relied on standard statistical methods that do not allow a comprehensive examination of the range in variation of diagnostic call parameters. We present data from a broad range of sites throughout mainland United States and Hawaii, and compare a multivariate statistical approach with repertoire plots of characteristic frequency versus call duration. Although we demonstrated a statistical finding of geographic variation in L. cinereus, small sample size, context, and behavior could not be discounted as the proximal cause of observed variation. The perceived variation across the geographic range that we sampled did not affect our ability to identify the species by call structure. We suggest methods for future studies of geographic variation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 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".