MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1522640067 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v120i1.238

A Test of Interspecific Effects of Introduced Eastern Grey Squirrels, <em>Sciurus carolinensis</em>, on Douglas's Squirrels, <em>Tamiasciurus douglasii</em>, in Vancouver, British Columbia

2006· article· en· W1522640067 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Yeen Ten Hwang, Serge Larivière

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSciurus carolinensisSciurusInterspecific competitionEcologyCompetition (biology)GeographyBiologyNational parkHome rangeHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We compared the effects of absence and presence introduced Eastern Grey Squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis) on the demography of native Douglas’s Squirrels (Tamiasciurus douglasii) in two urban parks in Vancouver, British Columbia: Ecological Reserve #74 in Pacific Spirit Regional Park (Douglas’s Squirrel only) and Stanley Park (Douglas’s and Eastern Grey squirrels). Based on the exploitative competition hypothesis, we predicted that in the presence of introduced Eastern Grey squirrels, Douglas’s Squirrels would occur at lower densities, have larger home ranges, lower body mass, and poorer reproduction. Using mark-recapture methods, we found no differences in density, home range, or body mass of Douglas’s Squirrel between parks. However, the proportion of breeding Douglas’s Squirrels was higher in Ecological Reserve #74 in the absence of Eastern Grey Squirrel, than in Stanley Park. We found no evidence that Eastern Grey Squirrels are displacing Douglas’s Squirrels in Stanley Park, but less conspicuous negative effects such as reduced breeding propensity may still reflect the competitive interactions of the two squirrel species.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.733
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.197 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207