MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131354731 · doi:10.1644/06-mamm-a-127r1.1

Moose Calving Strategies in Interior Montane Ecosystems

2007· article· en· W2131354731 on OpenAlex
Kim G. Poole, Robert Serrouya, Kari Stuart-Smith

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mammalogy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsTembec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIce calvingForagePredationUngulateBiologyEcologyRange (aeronautics)GeographyHabitatElevation (ballistics)Animal scienceLactationPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Parturient ungulates are relatively more sensitive to predation risk than other individuals and during other times of the year. Selection of calving areas by ungulates may be ultimately related to trade-offs between minimizing risk of predation and meeting nutritional needs for lactation. We used digital and field data to examine selection of calving areas by 31 global positioning system–collared moose (Alces alces) in southeastern British Columbia. We examined movements 12 days before and after calving, and analyzed habitat selection at 2 scales of comparison: the immediate calving area to the extended calving area (100 ha), and the extended calving area to the surrounding home range. Maternal moose exhibited 1 of 2 distinct elevational strategies for calving area selection during the days leading up to calving: 16 moose were climbers and 15 were nonclimbers. Climbers moved a mean of 310 m higher in elevation to calve, whereas nonclimbers showed little change in elevation. Hourly movements by all maternal females increased 2- to 3-fold in the 1–4 days before calving and were generally directional, such that all calving areas were outside of areas used during the 12 days before calving. At the broad scale, elevation was the strongest predictor of the extended calving area within the home range. At the fine scale, climbers selected areas with reduced tree density, reduced forage, and increased distance from water, whereas nonclimbers selected areas with increased forage, decreased distance from water, and decreased slope. Beyond the obvious elevation difference between climbers and nonclimbers, moose appeared to exhibit 2 distinct calving strategies in mountainous ecosystems. A functional explanation for the 2 strategies may be that climbers moved into areas where forage quantity and quality were relatively low, but where risk of predation (mainly by grizzly bears [Ursus arctos]) also was reduced. Nonclimber moose calved in areas with higher forage values, and appeared to select areas at the finer scale to reduce predation risk (e.g., association with water and reduced tree density for visibility).

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.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.661

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.234
Teacher spread0.226 · 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