Social and spatial patterns determine the population structure and colonization processes in mouflon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although it is widely accepted that populations vary in space and time, defining the spatial scale of population structure relevant for understanding temporal variation or for management and conservation purposes remains a challenge. We studied jointly temporal patterns of social and spatial structures in an introduced population of mouflon ( Ovis gmelini musimon (Schreber, 1782)) to define the temporal stability of these structures and to uncover the history of the colonization process. We expected social organization to remain stable between years, mouflon to stay sedentary, and colonization to have occurred through a diffusion process. We used yearly censuses performed between 1994 and 2004, and collected information in managers’ archives and newspapers reporting the presence of mouflon in different areas since its introduction in 1954 in the Bauges mountains, France. Mouflons were divided into male and nursery groups, whose number (1.88 ± 0.31 for males and 7.54 ± 0.58 for nurseries) and composition (7.05 ± 1.25 individuals in male groups; 13.6 ± 1.41 females, 8.11 ± 0.72 lambs, and 6.51 ± 0.65 males in the nurseries) remained stable over years. The spatial distribution of nursery groups was clustered in five areas, highly correlated between years (p < 0.001), suggesting that the same groups were observed in given areas every year and confirming the sedentary lifestyle of the species. The presence–absence data of the species since its introduction suggested a colonization by diffusion. We discuss the social and spatial structures of the population and the type of colonization process that could have led to this kind of structure.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".