MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2024943690 · doi:10.1139/z05-162

Gender- and age-class-specific reactions to human disturbance in a sexually dimorphic ungulate

2005· article· en· W2024943690 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
John Loehr, M Kovanen, Jean Carey, Harri Högmander, Charles M. Jurasz, Satu Kärkkäinen, Jukka Suhonen, Hannu Ylönen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersArctic Institute of North America
KeywordsUngulateDisturbance (geology)BiologyOvisForagingEcologySexual dimorphismVigilance (psychology)PopulationOvis canadensisDemographyZoologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to optimality theory, an individual's characteristics should play a major part in determining antipredator strategies. We studied behavioural reactions to human presence of gender and age classes of 35 thinhorn sheep (Ovis dalli Nelson, 1884) in late winter 2001 in Faro, Yukon Territory, Canada. The behaviour of undisturbed sheep was observed from distances of 400–1200 m and compared with the behaviour recorded when one or two people were in close proximity to the sheep. Ewes decreased bedding and increased foraging when humans were present, but there were no changes in these behaviours in rams. Disturbance caused an increase in vigilance and a trend was found for adults to react more strongly to disturbance than juveniles. We demonstrate the importance for disturbance research of gaining detailed information about all different kinds of population members and using applicable statistical tests in the data analyses.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations25
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicWildlife Ecology and Conservation→French-language works237,207→