Population substructure and space use of Foxe Basin polar bears
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Climate change has been identified as a major driver of habitat change, particularly for sea ice-dependent species such as the polar bear (Ursus maritimus). Population structure and space use of polar bears have been challenging to quantify because of their circumpolar distribution and tendency to range over large areas. Knowledge of movement patterns, home range, and habitat is needed for conservation and management. This is the first study to examine the spatial ecology of polar bears in the Foxe Basin management unit of Nunavut, Canada. Foxe Basin is in the mid-Arctic, part of the seasonal sea ice ecoregion and it is being negatively affected by climate change. Our objectives were to examine intrapopulation spatial structure, to determine movement patterns, and to consider how polar bear movements may respond to changing sea ice habitat conditions. Hierarchical and fuzzy cluster analyses were used to assess intrapopulation spatial structure of geographic position system satellite-collared female polar bears. Seasonal and annual movement metrics (home range, movement rates, time on ice) and home-range fidelity (static and dynamic overlap) were compared to examine the influence of regional sea ice on movements. The polar bears were distributed in three spatial clusters, and there were differences in the movement metrics between clusters that may reflect sea ice habitat conditions. Within the clusters, bears moved independently of each other. Annual and seasonal home-range fidelity was observed, and the bears used two movement patterns: on-ice range residency and annual migration. We predict that home-range fidelity may decline as the spatial and temporal predictability of sea ice changes. These new findings also provide baseline information for managing and monitoring this polar bear population.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".