Raccoon Density and Movements After Population Reduction to Control Rabies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Population reduction (PR) and trap‐vaccinate‐release (TVR) were used to control an outbreak of the raccoon ( Procyon lotor ) variant of rabies in Ontario, Canada, during 1999. Raccoon density declined significantly following PR; however, density increased significantly 9–10 months post‐PR. Recolonization of PR areas with raccoons marked in TVR areas was very low with only 1.8% (32/1,759) of those raccoons dispersing into PR areas during 1999–2000. In addition, the number of raccoons dispersing from TVR areas into PR areas was not significantly greater than the number of raccoons dispersing into treatment areas where population reduction had not been implemented during 1999–2000. Raccoon movements in this study, determined by mark‐recapture, averaged < 4.0 km during 1999–2000 and did not differ among treatments (with or without PR). In summary, there was not a mass exodus of raccoons from TVR areas to PR areas during 1999–2000, suggesting there was not an immediate, dramatic, vacuum effect drawing raccoons into areas devoid of raccoons due to PR. However, one year post‐PR, raccoon populations were near or above pre‐PR densities (due to a high reproductive rate of resident raccoons), suggesting that PR would have to be an annual event if rabies is not eliminated from an area.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".