Captive-breeding population supplementation and reintroduction as tools to conserve endangered Arctic fox populations in Norway : detailed proposal and progress 2001-2004
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Within its Holarctic distribution, the global population of Artic foxes (Alopex lagopus) appears to be large and stable, however the populations of Fennoscandia were already endangered in the late 1920’s. This led to their protection in Sweden, Norway and Finland in 1928, 1930 and 1940 respectively. Despite their protected status there has been little or no indication of population recovery. Based on numbers of documented reproductions we estimate that there are no more than 50 adult arctic foxes in Norway. These animals are distributed widely, thus occurring in low actual numbers with gaps between the different populations.\n Why arctic fox populations have failed to recover after their protection could be because of the competition from red fox (Vulpes vulpes) together with demographic collapse as a result of population decline in a fragmented landscape. Because the current population is at such a critical stage, it is important to initiate conservation actions at once. Conservation actions that can be taken include (1) Supplementary feeding to increase survival and reproduction, (2) Red fox control to reduce competition and intraguild interactions, and (3) Population supplementation / reintroduction to restore connectivity. Conservation actions (1) and (2) have been conducted in Sweden and Finland, but existing experience is not yet sufficient to conclude if these actions are effective. Conservation action (3) is therefore proposed.\n Although translocation of arctic foxes is generally to be preferred over the use of captive-bred animals, there are no suitable sources of wild foxes for translocation. Populations on Svalbard are not suitable due to genetic differences and the occurrence of rabies. Populations in Siberia are also not suitable due to the occurrence of rabies. Furthermore animals from captive-breeding have been used successfully in many situations for many species.\n The arctic fox captive-breeding programme consists of carefully adjusting and developing the method that functions best for breeding wild-caught animals in captivity. Pups born in captivity will be released with pre-release training following the experience of a successful swift fox (Vulpes velox) reintroduction project in Canada. Release sites are chosen based on the available data on arctic fox ecology, former den availability and habitat distribution. All released foxes will be post-released monitored with help of expandable radio-collars. Also dens will be monitored annually to detect changes in population development. Defining the success of the captive-breeding programme will be based on (1) Survival, (2) Pair formations, and (3) Population growth. Different expertises and institutions, from Norway, Sweden and Finland are pooled to determine which actions seem to be most successful and thus enhance our success with the reintroduction programme.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».