Population characteristics and habitat selection of muskrats (Ondatra zibethicus) in response to water level management at the Summerberry Marsh Complex, The Pas, Manitoba, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydroelectric developments have significantly altered the hydrology and the historical wetland cycle in the Saskatchewan River Delta (SRD) by reducing both long term and within year flood frequency. This research details the responses of SRD wetlands to water level manipulation and links it to the habitats selected by muskrats thus highlighting the conditions that should be the focus of wetland management. Following the partial drawdown (PD) in the fall of 2007, muskrat densities derived from mark recapture surveys did not differ between PD and full supply level (FSL) wetlands. On a per flooded area basis, PD wetlands supported residual muskrat population at similar densities as FSL wetlands during the years of the drawdown. The partial drawdown resulted in increased amounts of senescent vegetation in PD wetlands in 2008 and 2009, mainly affecting Carex and Typha vegetation classes. The result of habitat selection modeling was generally consistent with other studies of muskrats, although it was complicated by the habitat structure of these northern wetlands. Muskrats selected for rooted Typha with greater frequency than any other habitat, followed by rooted Equisetum. Ducks Unlimited Canada's records from 1979 to 1990 show that water level drawdowns were successful at increasing muskrat house densities in SRD wetlands. In the years after a drawdown muskrat house densities generally increased and peaked three years after a drawdown, however the ten year densities were unaffected. Low muskrat densities, and low recruitment in SMC wetlands compared to other northern deltas are likely due to degenerating wetland habitat conditions created by prolonged water level stabilization. Small scale water level manipulation efforts by various managers, most notably Ducks Unlimited Canada, have produced increases in muskrat populations. Although expensive and logistically difficult the results I have presented suggest that a large scale drawdown and refill would stimulate muskrat populations in the SRD.
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".