MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112585301 · doi:10.2193/2006-266

Success of Grizzly Bear Population Augmentation in Northwest Montana

2007· article· en· W2112585301 on OpenAlexaffabout
Wayne F. Kasworm, Michael F. Proctor, Christopher Servheen, David Paetkau

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrsusCarnivoreGrizzly BearsPopulationGeographyReproductive successEcologyBiologyDemographyPredation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Augmentation of large carnivore populations can be a valuable management and recovery tool, but success of many programs has not been well documented. The Cabinet—Yaak grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos ) population was located in northwestern Montana and northern Idaho, USA, and was estimated at 30–40 individuals. The Cabinet Mountains portion of this area may be isolated from the remainder of the zone and was the site of a test of grizzly bear population augmentation. Experimental objectives included evaluating site fidelity, reproduction, and long‐term survival of the translocated bears. Four subadult females (2–6 yr old) were translocated from southeastern British Columbia, Canada, from 1990 to 1994. Three of 4 transplanted bears remained in the target area for ≥1 year and satisfied the short‐term goal for site fidelity. Recent genetic evidence gathered through hair‐snagging efforts has determined that at least one of the original transplanted animals has reproduced, thereby providing evidence of success for the long‐term goals of survival and reproduction.

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)0.001
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations82
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wildlife ManagementSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207