MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112002019 · doi:10.1139/z08-029

The effects of high ungulate densities on foraging choices by beaver (Castor canadensis) in the mixed-wood boreal forest

2008· article· en· W2112002019 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Glynnis A. Hood, Suzanne E. Bayley

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and biodiversity studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForagingUngulateBeaverCastor canadensisBiologyCompetition (biology)EcologyForageHabitatHerbivoreIntraspecific competitionContext (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In some areas of North America previous management policies have created competition between beaver ( Castor canadensis Kuhl, 1820) and ungulates, resulting in dramatic declines in beaver populations. Some authors attribute this decline to competitive exclusion. Generally, the less niche overlap between competitors, the lower potential competition between them. Differences between foraging behaviour of beaver and ungulates suggest that they could not compete to the point of either competitive exploitation or complete exclusion except in restricted habitats. We tested this assumption under two levels of foraging intensity by ungulates by examining the effects of resource competition on beaver forage choices in the context of central place foraging theory. Ungulate densities and foraging intensity within Elk Island National Park (EINP) in Alberta, Canada, were significantly higher than those immediately adjacent to the park, where foraging pressure was lower. Within EINP, forage availability (e.g., stem densities and stem diameters) of many woody plants preferred by beaver, such as Populus L. and Salix L., were depressed by intense foraging by ungulates. Beaver adapted to the effects of high ungulate densities on forage resources by adapting their foraging behaviour. This finding suggested that competitive exploitation, rather than exclusion, exists in EINP. EINP is a productive system that offers an array of forage species, which potentially buffers the effects of competition between ungulates and beaver.

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 score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score0.898

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.165 · 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

Citations36
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicEcology and biodiversity studiesFrench-language works237,207