MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146531226 · doi:10.2193/2006-406

Ecology and Translocation‐Aided Recovery of an Endangered Badger Population

2008· article· en· W2146531226 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Trevor A. Kinley, Nancy J. Newhouse

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBadgerBiological dispersalHome rangeBiologyEcologyEndangered speciesPopulationRange (aeronautics)Survivorship curveLitterSubspeciesHabitatDemographyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Southern British Columbia, Canada, is the northwestern range limit of the American badger ( Taxidea taxus ) and supports a nationally endangered subspecies. We initially investigated space‐use, diet, and demography in southeastern British Columbia to characterize range‐limit ecology. Resident badgers in the northern part (NP) of our study area were extirpated or nearly so during our study (λ = 0.7), whereas the southern (SP) badger population remained viable (λ = 1.2). This apparent difference in viability between NP and SP may have been confounded by timing because research occurred later in SP; litter size, number of Columbian ground squirrels ( Spermophilus columbianus ) consumed, and home range size were each correlated nearly equally to latitude and date of research, and survivorship was greater later in the study for both the NP and SP. Collectively, these factors indicated temporal, not just spatial, variability. Therefore, we translocated badgers into the NP to 1) determine whether the NP had lost its capacity to support badgers or had merely experienced the variability expected at a range limit and, if the latter, 2) initiate recovery. Translocated animals and their offspring had kit production equivalent to that of SP residents, adult survivorship intermediate between the NP and SP residents, and no confirmed kit mortality, with population growth projected (λ = 1.3). Diet of translocated individuals was similar to that of residents. Home ranges of translocated females were intermediate between the 2 resident groups, and home ranges of translocated males were not different than either resident group. Juvenile dispersal dates and distances were similar to those of residents for each sex. Our results were consistent with the extirpation of the NP being driven by temporally variable conditions or the effect of random events expected at range limits. The extirpation of NP did not appear to have been primarily due to any permanent loss of the NP's capacity to support badgers. At 3.5 years after starting translocations, badgers remained in the NP within an apparently growing population. We found translocation to be a useful diagnostic and conservation tool for badgers at their northern limit. Its utility may extend to countering the fluctuations typical of other rare, range‐limit species.

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 score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

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 studies0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations54
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wildlife ManagementSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207