MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053364333 · doi:10.1139/z06-192

Local- and landscape-level den selection of striped skunks on the Canadian prairies

2007· article· en· W2053364333 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Yeen Ten Hwang, Serge Larivière, François Messier

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanCegep de Sainte Foy
FundersInstitute for Wetland and Waterfowl Research, Ducks Unlimited CanadaUniversity of Pittsburgh
KeywordsHabitatWoodlandGrasslandEcologyWetlandBiologyPopulationGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined the seasonal landscape and habitat use patterns of striped skunks ( Mephitis mephitis Schreber, 1776). We tracked 52 male and 72 female skunks from September 1999 to June 2003 in Saskatchewan, Canada. At the local level, den structures differed by sex and season. In autumn/winter, all skunks preferred buildings, whereas in spring/summer females selectively used underground burrows and rock piles for parturition and rearing of young, and males used aboveground retreats. Den sites were closer to crop fields, roads, water sources, and macrohabitat edges than random sites. At the landscape level, den sites were associated positively with weighted mean shape index of crop fields, mean patch size of water bodies, total edge of water bodies, and weighted mean fractal dimensions of grassland, woodland, and farmsteads, suggesting that wetland edges and habitat complexity are important in den selection by skunks. Compositional analysis revealed sex- and season-specific differences at the population level. Both sexes preferred grassland/pastures and farmstead habitats for establishing den sites. In autumn/winter, skunks preferred grassland/pastures for winter dens. However, in spring/summer skunks preferred farmsteads for resting sites. Our results suggest that skunks respond to landscape and habitat features surrounding den sites, and not just specific den or local habitat characteristics.

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 score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations41
Published2007
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207