MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1930216648 · doi:10.1002/jwmg.936

Spatiotemporal variation in the distribution of potential predators of a resource pulse: Black bears and caribou calves in Newfoundland

2015· article· en· W1930216648 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Nathaniel D. Rayl, Todd K. Fuller, John F. Organ, John E. McDonald, Robert D. Otto, Guillaume Bastille‐Rousseau, Colleen E. Soulliere, Shane P. Mahoney

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsTrent UniversityDepartment of Environment and ConservationGovernment of Newfoundland and Labrador
FundersDepartment of Environment and Conservation, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador
KeywordsUrsusPredationIce calvingEcologyHerdPredatorBiologyForagingGeographyPopulationDemographyLactation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Understanding spatiotemporal variability in prey accessibility is important for disentangling predator‐prey interactions and is relevant to management interventions to reduce predation. Recently, caribou (Rangifer tarandus) in Newfoundland declined by 66%, with calf predation by black bears (Ursus americanus) implicated as a major proximate mechanism of the decline. Most predation occurs when calves are aggregated on calving grounds. We used telemetry data from 271 caribou and 45 black bears in 2 caribou herd ranges to examine spatial variability in calf accessibility, identify the distribution of potentially predatory bears, and assess the aggregative response of bears to the calf resource. We predicted whether a bear was a visitor to a calving ground during the calving season (a potentially predatory bear) based upon its sex, the herd range it occupied, its distance to the calving grounds, and the season. The distribution of potentially predatory bears and their degree of segregation from non‐predatory bears varied seasonally. The probability of a bear visiting the calving grounds during calving decreased with increasing distance from the calving grounds, and was greater for males than for females in all seasons at distances beyond 2.4 km from the calving grounds. Residency time of bears increased in the calving grounds of 1 herd during calving, suggesting an aggregative response to neonates in that area. For both herds, the estimated distribution of potentially predatory bears was much larger than the calving grounds, illustrating that the relevant scale of predator‐prey interactions may extend far beyond the area where lethal encounters occur. Our work highlights the value of examining spatiotemporal dynamics of predator movements prior to implementing ecosystem manipulations designed to reduce predation and provides a modeling framework that can be used to guide management interventions in systems with aggregated prey. © 2015 The Wildlife Society.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations17
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wildlife ManagementSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207