The bioclimatic envelope of the wolverine (<i>Gulo gulo</i>): do climatic constraints limit its geographic distribution?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a fundamental geographic distribution for the wolverine ( Gulo gulo (L., 1758)) based on the hypothesis that the occurrence of wolverines is constrained by their obligate association with persistent spring snow cover for successful reproductive denning and by an upper limit of thermoneutrality. To investigate this hypothesis, we developed a composite of MODIS classified satellite images representing persistent snow cover from 24 April to 15 May, which encompasses the end of the wolverine’s reproductive denning period. To investigate the wolverine’s spatial relationship with average maximum August temperatures, we used interpolated temperature maps. We then compared and correlated these climatic factors with spatially referenced data on wolverine den sites and telemetry locations from North America and Fennoscandia, and our contemporary understanding of the wolverine’s circumboreal range. All 562 reproductive dens from Fennoscandia and North America occurred at sites with persistent spring snow cover. Ninety-five percent of summer and 86% of winter telemetry locations were concordant with spring snow coverage. Average maximum August temperature was a less effective predictor of wolverine presence, although wolverines preferred summer temperatures lower than those available. Reductions in spring snow cover associated with climatic warming will likely reduce the extent of wolverine habitat, with an associated loss of connectivity.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".