Habitat selection and home-range dynamics of the Gaspé caribou: a hierarchical analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We used several spatial and temporal scales to determine space and habitat use of the caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) of the Gaspé Peninsula. Thirty-five radio-collared caribou were followed from November 1998 to April 2001. Habitat use was studied by superimposing radiolocations on ecoforestry maps using five predefined habitat types (deciduous, immature, mature spruce, mature fir, and barren). At a finer scale, we tracked caribou in forested areas during winter 2000 and 2001 in order to describe physical and biological characteristics of foraging tracks and used stands. Our results indicated that the distribution of caribou extended beyond the limits of Gaspé Conservation Park. Patterns of space use showed the existence of three groups, which formed a metapopulation. These groups consisted of spatially distinct units that used space and habitat differently. At the home-range level, caribou preferred barren areas found in alpine and subalpine zones at all times of the year. The most frequently used forested habitat type was the mature fir. At the finer scale of foraging tracks, caribou selected fir stands characterized by dense snow conditions and large diameter trees bearing greater quantities of lichen. Our results demonstrated the importance of protecting areas outside the park that are likely to become used or reused by caribou, and of managing these areas to increase settlement by caribou. Lastly, management plans must be adapted to each of the three groups forming this metapopulation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".