Spatial relationships between swift foxes and coyotes in northwestern Texas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interspecific competition among canids can result in mortalities and spatial displacement of smaller canids by larger canids. To investigate mortalities and spatial relationships of swift foxes (Vulpes velox) and coyotes (Canis latrans), we captured and radio-tracked both species at Rita Blanca National Grasslands in northwestern Texas. At least 89% of swift fox mortalities were caused by coyotes, resulting in a relatively low annual survival of 0.47 for swift foxes. Annual home ranges of swift foxes occurred near the periphery and outside coyote home ranges, and did not overlap or only slightly overlapped coyote core areas. Thirty-three of 36 known swift fox dens occurred outside coyote core areas. When swift foxes established dens within coyote core areas (n = 3), they were killed by coyotes shortly thereafter. Our data indicated that spatial displacement of swift foxes was not due to behavioral avoidance of coyotes but rather to increased killing of swift foxes within coyote core areas. Most mortalities caused by coyotes occurred in the immediate vicinity of swift fox dens, suggesting that coyotes made an active effort to kill swift foxes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".