MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141494041 · doi:10.1002/jwmg.14

Harvest regulations and artificial selection on horn size in male bighorn sheep

2011· article· en· W2141494041 on OpenAlexaffabout
Pamela E. Hengeveld, Marco Festa‐Bianchet

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvis canadensisEcotypeFrench hornBiologyOvisDemographyAnimal scienceEcologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Wild sheep in North America are highly prized by hunters and most harvest regulations restrict legal harvest to males with a specified minimum horn curl. Because reproductive success is skewed toward larger males that are socially dominant, these regulations may select against high‐quality, fast‐growing males. To evaluate potential selective effects of alternative management strategies, we analyzed horn increment measures of males harvested over 28 yr (1975–2003) in 2 bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) ecotypes in British Columbia, Canada. Using mixed‐effect models we examined variation in hunter selection for horn size, early horn growth, and male age under different harvest regulations (Full Curl, Three Quarter Curl, Any Ram). Under all regulations, males with the greatest early horn growth were harvested at the youngest ages, before the age at which large horns influence reproductive success. Early growth decreased with harvest age and until ≥7 yr of age it was greatest in males harvested under Full Curl regulation. Permit type (General vs. Limited Entry Hunt) and hunter origin (British Columbia Resident vs. Non‐Resident) had little effect on horn size of harvested males. Full Curl regulations increased the average age of harvested males by <1 yr relative to Three‐Quarter Curl regulations. Age‐specific horn measures in the California ecotype harvested under Three‐Quarter Curl regulations declined over time but we observed no temporal declines in the Rocky Mountain ecotype, primarily harvested under Full Curl regulations. Management strategies that protect some males with greater early horn growth or provide harvest refuges to maintain genetic diversity are likely to reduce potential for negative effects of artificial selection. © 2010 The Wildlife Society

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations40
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wildlife ManagementSame topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockFrench-language works237,207