MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139765146

Population Distribution and Seasonal Resource Selection by Elk (Cervus elaphus) in Central Ontario

2014· dissertation· en· W2139765146 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David McGeachy

Bibliographic record

VenueLu Zone Ul (Laurentian University) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCervus elaphusGeographySelection (genetic algorithm)PopulationResource (disambiguation)EcologyDistribution (mathematics)FisheryBiologyDemographyComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding population structure and resource selection are essential for wildlife management and conservation. I assessed the population structure and resource selection of elk (Cervus elaphus) in central Ontario. I used fuzzy and hierarchical cluster analyses to elucidate elk population structure based on spatial data collected from 41 radio-collared elk. I assessed impacts of habitat quality on space use using the minimum convex polygon (MCP) and fixed kernel methods. I evaluated resource selection by elk in winter, spring, summer, and fall, from December 2011 to August 2013, using resource selection functions (RSF’s). I used a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) to evaluate resource selection functions and used Akaike information criterion (AICc ) to select the best model of 20 candidate models constructed a priori. Models included parameters representing resources known to be important to elk: elevation, aspect, slope, distance to roads and water, and habitat. Both fuzzy and hard clustering indicated that elk in Central Ontario occur in a metapopulation that includes 5 subpopulations. The largest cluster consisted of a core group of 22 radio-collared elk located in Burwash with several satellite subpopulations spread along a 50km long north-south axis and a small subpopulation to the west located in Worthington. Survival rates among subpopulations were similar ranging from 0.71 to 0.83; however, anthropogenic causes of mortality were predominant only in the Burwash subpopulation. Space use and density of elk differed between core and satellite subpopulations. Resource selection by elk differed by time of day and season. In all seasons, elk selected open habitats at night and more forested areas during the day. Elk avoided areas close to roads in spring, but selected them in winter at night. Elk selected higher elevations in winter and for south facing slopes in spring and fall. Elk displayed strong crepuscular activity patterns in all seasons; however, movements were limited in winter. Understanding population structure is important in order to develop appropriate management plans. My results support the conclusion that population structure can be reliably assessed using spatial data. Resource selection is a dynamic process that changes with seasons, as well as animal activity across the diel period. Resource selection should include time of day in order to obtain a complete picture of resources important to a particular species and to support the conservation of habitats used for various animal activities.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.163 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLu Zone Ul (Laurentian University)Same topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207