MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fine‐Scale Habitat Associations of Red‐Backed Voles in Boreal Mixedwood Stands

2010· article· en· W2149978814 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mark C. Vanderwel, Jay R. Malcolm, John P. Caspersen, Mark Newman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsUnderstoryShrubBorealCoarse woody debrisEcologyBlack spruceVegetation (pathology)Environmental scienceHabitatTaigaSnagGeographyForestryBiologyCanopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: To provide habitat for late‐successional wildlife species, new ecosystem‐based forest management practices aim to retain elements of complex stand structure, including live residual trees, dead wood legacies, and advanced regeneration, within managed stands. Predicting the effectiveness of these strategies is a challenge for species whose habitat relationships may involve multiple factors and can vary among sites. For 2 years, we live‐trapped a common, late‐successional microtine rodent, the southern red‐backed vole ( Myodes [formerly Clethrionomys ] gapperi ), in 40 1.4‐ha boreal mixedwood sites in Ontario, Canada. Using a neighborhood‐scale modeling approach, we related red‐backed vole capture locations to spatially referenced measures of overstory trees, shrubs and saplings, downed woody debris (DWD), and forest floor substrate. We further assessed how associations with these features varied with availability of the features within a site and as a function of stand management history. In spring, red‐backed voles were associated with trap stations that had, within a 26‐m radius, a dense shrub layer, abundant late‐decay DWD, coniferous understory and litter, and possibly, understory vegetation associated with moist conditions. Positive associations with shrub cover, late‐decay DWD, and a moisture‐associated understory were most apparent in sites in which these elements were scarce (e.g., <1,500 stems/ha of hardwood saplings and short shrubs; <0.8% projected ground cover of late‐decay DWD). The importance of late‐decay DWD; shade‐tolerant, coniferous understory composition; and substrate varied depending on a site's management history, with each feature having a strong positive effect in 47–64‐year‐old stands that were harvested using horse skidding and weaker effects in both 31–40‐year‐old stands that were clearcut with mechanical skidding and >80‐year‐old fire‐origin stands. Our models of fine‐scale habitat relationships for red‐backed voles may be useful in establishing structural retention guidelines suitable for wildlife species dependent on late‐successional habitat structure. In this regard, retaining abundant DWD and 10–30% live trees at harvest may be effective management strategies for providing favorable habitat conditions at localized scales.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.203 · 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.

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

Citations28
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wildlife ManagementSame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207