Propagule Size and the Relative Success of Exotic Ungulate and Bird Introductions to New Zealand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated factors affecting the success of 14 species of ungulates introduced to New Zealand around 1851-1926. The 11 successful species had a shorter maximum life span and were introduced in greater numbers than the three unsuccessful species. Because introduction effort was confounded with other life-history traits, we examined whether independent introductions of the same species were more likely to succeed when a greater number of individuals were introduced. For the six species with introductions that both succeeded and failed, successful introductions always involved an equal or greater number of individuals than unsuccessful introductions of the same species. For all independent introductions, there was a highly significant relationship between the number of individuals introduced and introduction success. When data for ungulate and bird introductions to New Zealand were combined, a variable categorizing species as ungulate or bird was a highly significant predictor of introduction success, after variation in introduction effort was controlled. For a given number of individuals introduced, ungulates were much more likely to succeed than birds.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".