MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029288087 · doi:10.2193/2008-275

Understanding Fluctuations in Bobcat Harvest at the Northern Limit of Their Range

2009· article· en· W2029288087 on OpenAlexaffabout
Maxime Lavoie, Pierre‐Yves Collin, FLORENT LEMIEUX, Hélène Jolicoeur, Pierre Canac-Marquis, Serge Larivière

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsMinistère des Ressources naturelles et des Forêts (Québec)Université du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova scotiaGeographyPopulationPopulation declineEcologyForestryBiologyDemographyHabitatArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT In Quebec, Canada, harvest of bobcats ( Lynx rufus ) started to decline in 1985 and by 1991, harvest seasons were closed due to concerns of a perceived population decline. Since the closing of harvest season in 1991, the average temperature has increased, snow quantity has decreased, and important changes in agriculture and forest management have occurred. In light of changing conditions, the situation of Quebec bobcats needed reassessment. Thus, we analyzed harvest data to clarify the current status of bobcat populations in Quebec. From 1980 to 1991, bobcat harvest in Quebec was strongly correlated with bobcat harvest in Maine (USA), Nova Scotia (Canada), Ontario (Canada), and Vermont (USA). Extrapolations of harvest in Quebec relative to harvest in Maine, Ontario, Vermont, and Nova Scotia suggested an increase in number of bobcats after 1991. Mass of male and female bobcats before 1991 was less than mass of animals captured after 1991. Percentage of juveniles in the reported harvest before 1991 was higher than after 1991. However, percentage of males and litter sizes in the harvest did not differ before and after 1991. The geographic distribution of bobcats captured has gradually expanded after the closure of the harvest season. Our findings suggest that bobcat populations in Quebec have recovered from the 1985–1991 decline, and that the harvest season for this species could resume. This study also illustrates how managers can rely on data from neighboring jurisdiction to manage species when local harvest data is unavailable.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.229
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations15
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wildlife ManagementSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207