MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083216406 · doi:10.1139/z01-126

Space-use strategies of female polar bears in a dynamic sea ice habitat

2001· article· en· W2083216406 on OpenAlex
Mette Mauritzen, Andrew E. Derocher, Øystein Wiig

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsUrsus maritimusHome rangeEcologyBiologySea icePopulationRange (aeronautics)Intraspecific competitionArcticPredationPhilopatryHabitatForagingGeographyBiological dispersalDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In environments with high spatiotemporal variability in resources, animals may exhibit nomadic movements for resource tracking as opposed to long-term area fidelity. Polar bears (Ursus maritimus) inhabit the dynamic sea ice, preying on seals, and demonstrate considerable intraspecific variation in space use. We studied patterns of fidelity and annual range size for 74 adult female polar bears captured in the Norwegian Arctic that were tracked for up to 5 years using satellite telemetry data. We used the autocorrelation structure of movements and distance between observations at a 1-year interval as measures of fidelity. The female polar bears had a circannual migration pattern. Annual range size varied with reproductive state and geographic location of the range. Females entering maternity dens had smaller annual ranges than females not entering dens. Nearshore females had smaller annual ranges than pelagic females, demonstrating different space-use strategies. Repeatability of movement patterns indicated strategy specialization. We suggest that the different space-use strategies result from variation in habitat and prey selection and in sea-ice dynamics. Factors affecting population and predator–prey dynamics may interact differently with the different space-use strategies and yield strategy-dependent outcomes, therefore a knowledge of movement strategies may be important for understanding polar bear population dynamics.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.215 · 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