Winter Forage Selection in White‐Tailed Deer at High Density: Balsam Fir is the Best of a Bad Choice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: We assessed winter forage selection by white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) on Anticosti Island, Quebec, Canada, using cafeteria‐feeding trials. Winter habitat on Anticosti is degraded and free‐ranging deer at high densities consume 70% balsam fir (Abies balsamea) and 20% white spruce (Picea glauca) , even though spruce is much more available than fir. Deer ate 89.9% balsam fir and 10.1% white spruce when the availability of both trees was equal. Deer did not eat shredded twigs more than intact twigs. Fiber content and condensed tannins were greater in white spruce than in balsam fir. Deer preference for fir was not based on texture but, more likely, on plant constituents, so we concluded that deer will nearly eliminate fir before they use any significant amount of white spruce. Management actions, therefore, need to be undertaken to enhance balsam fir regeneration.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".