MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sinks without borders: snowshoe hare dynamics in a complex landscape

2009· article· en· W1989298362 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paul C. Griffin, L. Scott Mills

Bibliographic record

VenueOikos · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowshoe hareHabitatEcologyGeographyPopulationOccupancyPer capitaPopulation densityPopulation growthRange (aeronautics)BiologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A full understanding of population dynamics of wide‐ranging animals should account for the effects that movement and habitat use have on individual contributions to population growth or decline. Quantifying the per‐capita, habitat‐specific contribution to population growth can clarify the value of different patch types, and help to differentiate population sources from population sinks. Snowshoe hares, Lepus americanus , routinely use various habitat types in the landscapes they inhabit in the contiguous US, where managing forests for high snowshoe hare density is a priority for conservation of Canada lynx, Lynx canadensis . We estimated density and demographic rates via mark–recapture live trapping and radio‐telemetry within four forest stand structure (FSS) types at three study areas within heterogeneous managed forests in western Montana. We found support for known fate survival models with time‐varying individual covariates representing the proportion of locations in each of the FSS types, with survival rates decreasing as use of open young and open mature FSS types increased. The per‐capita contribution to overall population growth increased with use of the dense mature or dense young FSS types and decreased with use of the open young or open mature FSS types, and relatively high levels of immigration appear to be necessary to sustain hares in the open FSS types. Our results support a conceptual model for snowshoe hares in the southern range in which sink habitats (open areas) prevent the buildup of high hare densities. More broadly, we use this system to develop a novel approach to quantify demographic sources and sinks for animals making routine movements through complex fragmented landscapes.

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 categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations100
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOikosSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207