Are American Pikas (<em>Ochotona princeps</em>) in the Canadian Rockies vulnerable to climate change?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The American Pika (Ochotona princeps) is vulnerable to climate change as a result of its dependence on cool, moist conditions. Most research on climatic determinants of American Pika distribution has been done in the United States where conditions are different from those in the higher-latitude pika ranges of the Canadian Rockies. I examined recent (1980–2009) and future (2050s and 2080s) average and maximum mean summer temperatures for 114 current American Pika locations in Alberta to assess whether future conditions are likely to place these animals at risk. At all current sites, mean summer temperatures (MSTs) in the 2050s are expected to be below that chosen by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service as a threshold for at-risk status of O. princeps. By the 2050s, most current American Pika locations have sufficient elevation within 5 km to allow individuals to migrate vertically to reach habitat with MST similar to that of their current location. Even in the 2080s, almost all current sites have sufficient elevation within 5 km to maintain extreme single-year and average MSTs lower than the highest values recorded at those sites in the recent past (13.9°C and 12.5°C respectively). However, by the 2080s under an extreme greenhouse gas emissions scenario, only 34% of current pika sites will allow for such migration. Although considerable uncertainty remains, particularly with respect to availability of habitat, these results suggest that American Pika populations in Alberta will likely be capable of persisting throughout this century, although their survival will depend increasingly on successful vertical migration.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".