MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Interacting effect of wolves and climate on recruitment in a northern mountain caribou population

2010· article· en· W2121536992 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Troy Hegel, Atle Mysterud, Falk Huettmann, Nils Chr. Stenseth

Bibliographic record

VenueOikos · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUngulatePacific decadal oscillationEcologyCanisPopulationPredationSnowHerbivoreForageGeographyRange (aeronautics)Environmental scienceBiologyHabitatDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is limited research on the influence of Pacific‐based climate in large herbivore populations. Additionally, much of our understanding on the effect of large‐scale climate on ungulate population dynamics has occurred on forage‐limited rather than predator‐limited populations. We compared the influence of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), North Pacific Index, and local weather on recruitment in a predator‐limited mountain‐dwelling caribou Rangifer tarandus caribou population in the Yukon Territory, Canada, across a range of wolf Canis lupus densities. A large‐scale wolf removal program allowed us to examine the role of Pacific climate and weather when wolves were reduced to ∼15% of their pre‐removal levels. Recruitment was best explained by the interaction of wolf density and April‐PDO, with wolf density explaining the most deviance. Predicted recruitment during good springs was 0.45 (SE = 0.04) during wolf removal and 0.29 (SE = 0.03) with no wolf removal. During poor springs (low PDO, increased snow depth) predicted recruitment was 0.55 (SE = 0.10) during wolf removal and 0.12 (SE = 0.03) with no wolf removal. With non‐altered wolf densities, there was a positive relationship between April‐PDO and recruitment due to reduced snow depth at calving, allowing parturient females to disperse up in elevation away from predators. When wolf densities were substantially reduced there was a slight negative relationship between April‐PDO and recruitment, possibly due to a more rapid vegetation green‐up reducing the temporal availability of highly nutritious forage necessary for lactation and subsequent calf growth. Attempts to find general relationships between climate and ungulate population dynamics have proven difficult due to different ecological mechanisms by which climate affects individuals across populations. Temporally varying factors, such as predator density, may also play an important role in uncovering the mechanistic relationship between climate and population dynamics.

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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations33
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOikosSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207