MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Predicting spatio‐temporal recolonization of large carnivore populations and livestock depredation risk: wolves in the Italian Alps

2010· article· en· W2116501129 on OpenAlexafffund
Francesca Marucco, Eliot J. B. McIntire

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Ecology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsCarnivoreGeographyCanisBiological dispersalLivestockPopulationEcologyGray wolfHabitatDemographyBiologyForestryPredation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary 1. Wolves Canis lupus recently recolonized the Western Alps through dispersal from the Italian Apennines, representing one of several worldwide examples of large carnivores increasing in highly human‐dominated landscapes. Understanding and predicting expansion of this population is important for conservation because of its direct impact on livestock and its high level of societal opposition. 2. We built a predictive, spatially explicit, individual‐based model to examine wolf population expansion in this fragmented landscape, and livestock depredation risk. We developed the model based on known demographic processes, social structure, behaviour and habitat selection of wolves collected during a 10‐year intensive field study of this wolf population. 3. During model validation, our model accurately described the recolonization process within the Italian Alps, correctly predicting wolf pack locations, pack numbers and wolf population size, between 1999 and 2008. 4. We then projected packs and dispersers over the entire Italian Alps for 2013, 2018 and 2023. We predicted 25 packs (95% CI: 19–32) in 2013, 36 (23–47) in 2018 and 49 (29–68) in 2023. The South‐Western Alps were the main source for wolves repopulating the Alps from 1999 to 2008. The source area for further successful dispersers will probably shift to the North‐Western Alps after 2008, but the large lakes in the Central Alps will probably act as a spatial barrier slowing the wolf expansion. 5. Using the pack presence forecasts, we estimated spatially explicit wolf depredation risk on livestock, allowing tailored local and regional management actions. 6. Synthesis and applications. Our predictive model is novel because we follow the spatio‐temporal dynamics of packs, not just population size, which have substantially different requirements and impacts on wolf–human conflicts than wandering dispersers. Our approach enables prioritization of management efforts, including minimizing livestock depredations, identifying important corridors and barriers, and locating future source populations for successful wolf recolonization of the Alps.

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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations107
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied EcologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207