MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1915656458 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v124i3.1078

Mineral Lick Visitation by Mountain Goats, <em>Oreamnos americanus</em>

2010· article· en· W1915656458 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Clifford G. Rice

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceNational Park ServiceU.S. Forest ServiceCalifornia Department of Fish and WildlifeWestern Washington University
KeywordsGeologyMineralAnimal scienceBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many species, including Mountain Goats (Oreamnos americanus), are known to visit mineral licks, but the extent and duration of use are poorly understood because most studies consist of observations at licks. I studied the movements to, from, and near mineral licks of 11 mountain goats in Washington wearing Global Positioning System (GPS) collars for a total of 169 goat-months of tracking and evaluated chemical composition of six mineral licks compared with reference soil samples. I recorded 101 mineral lick visits to 13 mineral licks. Each GPS fix was classified as moving toward a mineral lick, in the vicinity of a lick, on an excursion from a lick, moving away from a lick, or not associated with lick use. Depending on annual movement patterns associated with lick use, each Mountain Goat was classified as a Migrant (single lick visit of long duration, n = 3 Mountain Goats), Sojourner (few visits of short duration, n = 2), Commuter (many visits of short duration, n = 5), or Resident (lick within normal range of movements, n = 1). Most mineral lick visits took place 01 June-15 August with peak visitation about 14 June-29 July. Migrants typically stayed in the vicinity of licks about a month (but as long as 51 days) whereas other mountain goats visited licks for 0.1-8 days (median = 1 day). Migrants also tended to take longer and move farther than other Mountain Goats when on movements to and from licks. Most Mountain Goats moved toward mineral licks faster (km/hr) than they moved away from licks. All licks had higher concentrations of sodium than reference samples (1.5-27 times as high), although concentrations of calcium, potassium, and sulphate tended to be higher as well, whereas magnesium was not. Mineral lick visitation has costs (energetics of travel, reduced forage, and predation risk). Depending on the importance of these costs, mountain goats evidently use various strategies for exploiting mineral licks as exemplified by the movement types (migrant, sojourner, commuter, or resident). Notably, most of the Mountain Goats in this study crossed national forest, county and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife region boundaries to another to visit mineral licks. Thus, coordination among administrative units is needed in management of Mountain Goats and mineral licks they use.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.744
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.202 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations14
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207