Spatial-use patterns, movements, and interactions among adult coyotes in central Mississippi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, coyotes (Canis latrans) have expanded their range to include most areas of the southeastern United States. However, most research on coyotes has been conducted in western and northern regions of North America. We radio-monitored 38 adult coyotes from 1993 to 1997 in central Mississippi. Home-range sizes (P = 0.681) and core-area (area of concentrated use) sizes (P = 0.736) were similar across seasons, but females maintained larger home ranges (P = 0.006) and core areas (P < 0.001) than males. Male-male, female-female, and male-female home-range overlap was greatest during whelping and pup rearing. Except for mated pairs, core-area overlap was negligible across all seasons for adults maintaining neighboring home ranges. Coyote habitat selection varied across spatial scales, though selection was similar between males and females at all scales. Coyote movement rates differed (P < 0.001) temporally, being highest during nocturnal periods. Overall, the highest movement rates for the monitored population were observed for females during summer. Two males and 2 females were suspected of forming pair bonds and frequently traveled together within shared home ranges, as did 2 adult males. Our data indicate that interactions among individual adults are influenced by sex, as most confirmed instances of direct contact occurred between pairs or suspected social groups. In our study area, neighboring adult coyotes exhibited territoriality at the core-area level.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".