MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153164724

Integrating habitat use and population dynamics of moose in northern New Hampshire.

2005· article· en· W2153164724 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David L. Scarpitti, Christopher W. Habeck, Anthony R. Musante, Peter J. Pekins

Bibliographic record

VenueAlces · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHabitatPopulationBiologyReproductionEcologyRange (aeronautics)Mortality rateFisheryAnimal scienceDemography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: The New Hampshire Fish and Game Department and the University of New Hampshire initiated research in northern New Hampshire to better understand population dynamics and seasonal habitat use of a moose population that has apparently stabilized, despite optimal habitat and modest harvest levels. In total, 94 moose were captured by helicopter (81 net-gunned and 13 tranquilized) in December 2001-2003 and 2 were darted at salt-licks in July of 2002. Capture mortality attributed to myopathy and injury was 4%. In comparison to measured reproduction during capture (63 and 100%), our ability to measure pregnancy by direct observations (69 and 100%) was validated in 2002-2003. Production was 0.82 and 0.85 calves per adult cow; rate of twinning was 20 and 10%. Calf mortality 2 months post-partum was similar (26 and 27%) each year. Annual mortality of adult/yearling moose was 27 and 12%. Hunting and vehicle collision mortality was 4 (all adult cows) and 6% (all calves but 1) each year. High annual winter calf mortality (38-43%) in late March and early April was associated with the combined effects of malnutrition and winter tick/lung nematodes. Winter home range size was not restricted, and composition of available habitat was similar across seasons although overlap was minimal between seasons. Consideration of habitat and population dynamics data suggests that ERWKGHQVLW\GHSHQGHQWDQGLQGHSHQGHQWIDFWRUVFRXOGEHLQAXHQFLQJWKHVWXG\SRSXODWLRQ

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)0.000
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 score0.276
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations19
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlcesSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207