MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135741565 · doi:10.1139/z06-021

Space use by Eurasian lynx in relation to reindeer migration

2006· article· en· W2135741565 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anna Danell, Henrik Andrén, Peter Segerström, Robert Franzén

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRange (aeronautics)BiologyPredationHome rangeEcologyDomesticationSeasonalityHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Semi-domesticated reindeer ( Rangifer tarandus tarandus (L., 1758)) is the primary prey of Eurasian lynx ( Lynx lynx (L., 1758)) in northern Sweden. The reindeer migrate between winter range in the forest and summer range in the mountains, a distance of 100–150 km. We studied space use by Eurasian lynx in relation to seasonal fluctuations of their primary prey in northern Sweden. The seasonal activity range sizes for males and single females were not significantly different between the three periods of the year (December–April, May–July, and August–November). The activity range size for family groups (i.e., female with kittens) was significantly smaller during summer than during autumn and winter. The mean distance between the centre of an individual lynx's activity range in one season to the centre of the activity range in the season immediately following did not differ significantly between seasons; mean distances were 6.6 km for males, 7.3 km for single females, and 8.4 km for family groups. This is about one order of magnitude shorter than the distance between summer and winter ranges for reindeer (100–150 km). The grand mean overlap between a lynx's activity range in one season and the next season was more than 40%. Hence, Eurasian lynx in northern Sweden do not appear to move with the migrating semi-domesticated reindeer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations42
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207