Density, movements, and survival of raccoons in Ontario, Canada: implications for disease spread and management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract During 1994–2007 a total of 156,416 raccoons was live-captured in Ontario, Canada, as part of mark–recapture studies to estimate raccoon density during rabies-control operations. Mean density in southern Ontario ranged between 3.4 and 13.6 raccoons/km2 when density in northern Ontario was <1.5 raccoons/km2. Raccoon density also was significantly higher in mixed cropland and deciduous habitats than in large tracts of deciduous forest in southern Ontario. Raccoons generally travelled <5 km between years during 1994–1997 mark–recapture movement studies in Niagara; however, movements as great as 45 km and among-year differences in movements were observed. Raccoons in rural habitats also moved more extensively than those in urban areas in 1994. Mean home range (minimum convex polygon) for raccoons in eastern Ontario during 2003–2007 was 3.9 km2 for very-high-frequency–collared raccoons and 3.4 km2 for global positioning system–collared raccoons. Mean movement from the release site by collared raccoons over the study period was 1.5 km with the longest movement being 10.3 km. No single habitat was used more or less by collared raccoons than expected. Survival of radiocollared raccoons over the course of the study was 0.62 with survival of raccoons initially captured and released as juveniles and adults being an average of 964 and 786 days. Knowledge of the ecology of raccoons should be used during planning for disease management, and was critical to evaluating the success of rabies-control programs in Ontario, Canada.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".