Evaluation of Live‐Capture Techniques for Free‐Ranging Wolverines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Wolverines ( Gulo gulo ) are a rare carnivore and live‐capture efforts often comprise a significant component of field research projects. Wolverine studies have used aerial, snowmobile, hand‐capture, and live‐trap capture techniques. We reviewed existing wolverine live‐capture data to evaluate sex‐related biases associated with capture technique. We modified round log live traps, developed a new portable wooden live trap, and evaluated effects of live trap type, trap‐site selection, and seasonal timing of trapping on wolverine capture success. Aerial capture techniques had a positive bias for capture of male wolverines. Live‐capture rates were highest for portable wooden traps and lowest for barrel traps. Trapping success was highest during March when snow conditions were amenable to wolverine travel and temperatures improved bait effectiveness. Traps in corridor habitats were more successful than traps in noncorridor habitats. This difference was more pronounced in environments with rugged topography. We provide guidance for live‐trap operation, describe animal handling procedures, and provide detailed instructions for construction of modified round log and portable wooden wolverine live traps. These will benefit future wolverine studies by increasing trap effectiveness and reducing risk of injury and mortality to captured wolverines.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".