Water requirements as a bottleneck in the reintroduction of European roe deer to the southern edge of its range
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Success rates of reintroduction programs are low, often owing to a lack of knowledge of site-specific ecological requirements. A reintroduction program of European roe deer ( Capreolus capreolus (L., 1758)) in a dry Mediterranean region in Israel provides an opportunity to study the bottleneck effect of water requirements on a mesic-adapted species. Four does were hand-reared and released in a 10 ha site consisting of an early succession scrubland and a mature oak forest. We measured daily energy expenditure (DEE) and water turnover (WTO) using the doubly labeled water technique during summer and winter. DEE was similar in the summer and winter, but there was a significant difference in WTO and in the source of gained water. In winter, WTO was 3.3 L/day, of which 67% was obtained from vegetation. In summer, WTO dropped to 2.1 L/day, of which only 20% was obtained from the diet and 76% was gained from drinking. When the water source was moved to a nonpreferred habitat, drinking frequency dropped significantly, but water consumption remained constant. In a dry Mediterranean environment, availability of free water is both a physiological contraint and a behavioral constraint for roe deer. This study demonstrates the importance of physiological and behavioral feasibility studies for reintroduction programs.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".