Population dynamics of <i>Glaucomys</i> <i>sabrinus</i> and <i>Tamiasciurus douglasii</i> in old-growth and second-growth stands of coastal coniferous forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Habitat preferences and population dynamics of northern flying squirrels (Glaucomys sabrinus Shaw) and Douglas squirrels (Tamiasciurus douglasii Audubon and Bachman) were examined in old-growth and mature second-growth stands in British Columbia, Canada. Using markrecapture techniques to estimate population dynamics, we tested the hypothesis that old-growth stands provided higher-quality habitat than second-growth stands for these species. Populations were monitored in two old-growth and two mature second-growth stands from August 1995 to May 1999. We were unable to detect major differences in movement, density, recruitment, mass of males, survival, percentage of the population breeding, and the duration that individuals remained on the study plots between stand types for G. sabrinus. Similarly, with the exception of recruitment, we were unable to detect major differences in these parameters between stand types for T. douglasii. Recruitment of T. douglasii was higher in second-growth than in old-growth stands. Old-growth stands were not higher-quality habitat than second-growth stands for either species for the period of enquiry and the parameters we measured. We also presented evidence of late fall early winter breeding for G. sabrinus, as well as seasonal fluctuations in mass and trappability, larger movement by males than females, and the age of some squirrels exceeding 3.5 years.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".