MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004558959 · doi:10.1139/z03-172

Synchrony between caribou calving and plant phenology in depredated and non-depredated populations

2003· article· en· W2004558959 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eric Post, Pernille Sporon Bøving, Christian Pedersen, Megan A MacArthur

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredationHerbivorePhenologyBiologyForagePopulationEcologyPredatorReproductive successDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two main hypotheses have been proposed to explain reproductive synchrony exhibited by many species of large herbivores: the predation hypothesis and the seasonality hypothesis. Although examples supporting both hypotheses have been presented, no study has compared the intraseasonal progression of parturition and plant phenology in depredated and non-depredated populations of large herbivores. We monitored, on a daily or near-daily basis, the progression of the caribou (Rangifer tarandus) calving seasons in two populations: the Caribou River population in Alaska, U.S.A., where predators of caribou are present and the Kangerlussuaq-Sisimiut population in West Greenland where such predators have been absent for approximately 4000 years. Simultaneously, we quantified directly the phenological progression of caribou forage plants on spatially replicated plots in both study sites. Parturition was significantly more synchronous in the West Greenland (predator-free) population than in the Alaskan (depredated) population. Progression of the calving seasons in both populations was highly synchronized to the progression of forage plant phenology, and the slopes of these relationships were statistically indistinguishable, with 50% of births having occurred when approximately 60%–70% of forage plant species were emergent. These results document clear synchronization of the timing of parturition by caribou to plant phenology, regardless of predation pressure.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.194 · 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.

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

Citations114
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207