MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084190016 · doi:10.1890/10-0252.1

Energy gains predict the distribution of plains bison across populations and ecosystems

2011· article· en· W2084190016 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jean-Sébastien Babin, Daniel Fortin, John Wilmshurst, Marie-Eve Fortin

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsParks CanadaUniversité Laval
FundersNational Research Council CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaParks Canada
KeywordsForagingEcologyNational parkBison bisonGeographyEcosystemOptimal foraging theoryDistribution (mathematics)Vegetation (pathology)Biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Developing tools that help predict animal distribution in the face of environmental change is central to understanding ecosystem function, but it remains a significant ecological challenge. We tested whether a single foraging currency could explain bison (Bison bison) distribution in dissimilar environments: a largely forested environment in Prince Albert National Park (Saskatchewan, Canada) and a prairie environment in Grasslands National Park (Saskatchewan, Canada). We blended extensive behavioral observations, relocations of radio-collared bison, vegetation surveys, and laboratory analyses to spatially link bison distribution in the two parks and expected gains for different nutritional currencies. In Prince Albert National Park, bison were more closely associated with the distribution of plants that maximized their instantaneous energy intake rate (IDE) than their daily intake of digestible energy. This result reflected both bison's intensity of use of individual meadows and their selection of foraging sites within meadows. On this basis, we tested whether IDE could explain the spatial dynamics of bison reintroduced to Grasslands National Park. As predicted, bison distribution in this park best matched spatial patterns of plants offering rapid IDE rather than rapid sodium intake, phosphorus intake, or daily intake of digestible energy. Because the two study areas have very different plant communities, a phenomenological model of resource selection developed in one area could not be used to predict animal distribution in the other. We were able, however, to successfully infer the distribution of bison from their foraging objective. This consistency in foraging currency across ecosystems and populations provides a strong basis for forecasting animal distributions in novel and dynamic environments.

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)0.000
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.243
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

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

Citations39
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207