MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Translocating lions into an inbred lion population in the Hluhluwe‐iMfolozi Park, South Africa

2008· article· en· W1977600614 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Conservation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsMaple Leaf Foods
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationInbreedingPantheraBiologyInbreeding depressionEcologyLitterZoologyPredationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A fundamental problem in conservation biology is the risk of inbreeding in fragmented and declining populations. In the Hluhluwe‐iMfolozi Park (HiP), a small, enclosed reserve in South Africa, a large lion Panthera leo population arose from a founder group of five individuals in the 1960s. The HiP lion population went through a persistent decline and showed indications of inbreeding depression. To restore the genetic variation of the inbred HiP lion population, new lions were translocated into the existing population. Translocated females formed stable associations and established enduring pride areas with other translocated lionesses, but did not bond into native female prides. The translocated male coalition was more successful in gaining and maintaining residence in a pride than the translocated lone male that split off on his own from the male coalition. Litter size and cub survival was about twice as high for pairings involving at least one translocated parent than for pairings of two native lions. It is therefore possible to infuse new genes rapidly and successfully into a small, isolated lion population. Such translocations may become an important adaptive management tool as lion populations become increasingly fragmented.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.492

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.200 · 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