Mothers' Movements: Shifts in Calving Area Selection by Partially Migratory Elk
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ABSTRACT Loss of migratory behavior or shifts in migratory ranges are growing concerns to wildlife managers. How ungulates prioritize safety from predators at the expense of high‐quality foraging opportunities during calving may be key to understanding these shifts and long‐term reproductive success. We compared trade‐offs in selection for forage and predation risk by elk ( Cervus canadensis ) following 3 migratory tactics (western and eastern migration and resident) during 2 time periods in a declining (by almost 70% from 2002–2016), partially migratory elk population adjacent to Banff National Park in Alberta, Canada. We hypothesized that regardless of migratory tactic, maternal elk would show stronger trade‐offs between high‐quality foraging associated with higher predation risk and forage resources of lower‐quality yet lower risk on calving ranges than on ranges used during summer because of vulnerability of their offspring. Additionally, we hypothesized these trade‐offs would occur at high (2002–2006) and low (2013–2016) elk population sizes. We used a machine‐learning algorithm to predict dates of parturition based on global positioning system (GPS) movements of elk equipped with vaginal implants ( n = 60) and predictions were within 1.43 ± 0.85 (SE) days of the known date. We applied the model to an additional 58 GPS‐collared elk without vaginal implants. Based on changes in localized movements, we defined calving areas as the 26 days post‐parturition and compared habitat characteristics of calving areas to 10 similar‐sized areas centered on random locations during summer for the same individual in a latent selection framework. Across the 2 time periods, parturition occurred from 8 May–11 July with median parturition dates differing among migratory tactics and residents shifting towards an earlier parturition date in the later period. All elk, regardless of migratory tactic and time period, selected calving areas with greater forage resources than were available on areas used during summer, with no evidence for greater selection of areas that reduced predation risk at the expense of higher‐quality foraging. Calving season selection for areas with abundant forage exposed western migrants to high risk of bear ( Ursus spp.) predation, residents to high risk of wolf ( Canis lupus ) predation, and eastern migrants to low risk of bear and wolf predation. Patterns in exposure to predation risk during calving between migratory tactics were consistent with the recent decline in western migrants and increase in eastern migrants, implying that conditions on calving areas contributed to observed changes in the number of elk following these tactics. © 2021 The Wildlife Society.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».