Ecology of woodland caribou in central Manitoba : implications for forestry practices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in the boreal forest are believed to be threatened by human encroachment and associated disturbances such as resource exploration and extraction. Fifteen female woodland caribou were radiocollared and monitored in central Manitoba, from 1995 to 1997, to obtain information on their population range and distribution, movements, and habitat use in relation to forestry concerns. The population ranged over 4 600 km² within a large peatland system and concentrated their activities in two areas for both the summer and winter seasons. Females were relatively more solitary during the summer and exhibited fidelity to specific calving and summering areas averaging 83.4 km². Individual wintering locations varied between years and among individuals. Post-rut and pre-calving mixed-sex aggregations were observed on the southern portion of the herds range. Caribou from the northern part of the range utilized a traditional travel corridor moving as far as 65 km to access the aggregation areas and their summer or winter ranges. Adult survival during the study period was high, averaging 90%. Survival of the 1995 cohort also appeared to be high as indicated by the 0.65:1 calf-cow ratio, and 30% calf composition of observed caribou in the autumn of 1995. The annual rate of change (λ) of 1.19 from January to November of 1995 indicated that the population was increasing at that time. Habitat selection analyses at the home range level revealed that female woodland caribou preferred lowland black spruce to most other habitats except peatlands and jack pine. During the spring and summer at the third order of selection, females exhibited preferences for both lowland black spruce and treed peatlands while avoiding cutovers. Data for the autumn and winter suggested that lowlands and peatlands were heavily utilized during those months. Though occasional use of young cutovers was noted, woodland caribou tended to avoid harvested sites. As a result of past logging practices three main habitat types were available to caribou: young stands less than five years of age with little regenerating vegetation, stands dominated by trembling aspen with a secondary component of softwoods, and jack pine dominated stands. Due to the young age and high deciduous content of most regenerating stands; habitats created by logging were better suited for moose than woodland caribou.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".