MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062181748 · doi:10.1139/z04-179

Changes in mesopredator-community structure in response to urbanization

2004· article· en· W2062181748 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Suzanne Prange, Stanley D. Gehrt

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMesopredator release hypothesisDidelphisUrbanizationEcologyHabitatBiologyGeographyOpossumApex predator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Common raccoons (Procyon lotor (L., 1758)), Virginia opossums (Didelphis virginiana Kerr, 1792), and striped skunks (Mephitis mephitis (Schreber, 1776)) are common urban inhabitants, yet their relative demographic response to urbanization is unknown. Urbanization often affects community structure, and understanding these effects is essential in rapidly changing landscapes. We examined mesopredator-community structure in small and large patches of natural habitat surrounded by urban, suburban, or rural matrices. We created generalized logit models using road-survey and livetrapping data to examine effects of surrounding land use on proportions of opossums and skunks relative to raccoons, while accounting for effects of season and year and their interactions. For large sites, the land use × season model was chosen for both data sets, and occurrence of opossums and skunks relative to raccoons was higher at the rural site (P < 0.001 for all tests). For small sites, the land-use model best fit the road-survey data, with a higher occurrence of skunks relative to raccoons at the rural site (χ 2 = 21.06, df = 1, P < 0.001). However, the season model best fit the trapping data for small sites. Our data indicated that raccoons exhibited a greater demographic response to urbanization, suggesting that they exploit anthropogenic resources more efficiently. Although numerous reasons exist for disparity in anthropogenic-resource use, differences in intraspecific tolerance and the role of learning in foraging behaviors were best supported by our observations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations124
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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