MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171969189 · doi:10.1890/06-0534

STATE–SPACE MODELS LINK ELK MOVEMENT PATTERNS TO LANDSCAPE CHARACTERISTICS IN YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK

2007· article· en· W2171969189 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Monographs · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversité Laval
FundersDivision of Environmental BiologyNational Park ServiceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMovement (music)GeographyCrepuscularHabitatEcologyHome rangeUngulateSpatial ecologyNational parkBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Explaining and predicting animal movement in heterogeneous landscapes remains challenging. This is in part because movement paths often include a series of short, localized displacements separated by longer‐distance forays. This multiphasic movement behavior reflects the complex response of an animal to present environmental conditions and to its internal behavioral state. This state is an autocorrelated process influenced by preceding behaviors and habitats visited. Movement patterns depending on the behavioral state of an animal represent the broad‐scale response of that animal to the environment. Quantifying how animals respond both to local conditions and to their internal state reveals how animals respond to spatial heterogeneity at different spatial scales. We used a state–space statistical approach to model the internal behavioral state and the proximate movement response of elk ( Cervus elaphus ) to available forage biomass, landscape composition, topography, and wolf ( Canis lupus ) density during summer in Yellowstone National Park, USA. We analyzed movement paths of 16 female elk fitted with global positioning system (GPS) radio collars that recorded locations at 5‐h intervals. Habitat variables were quantified within 175 m radii (one‐half of the median 5‐h displacement) centered on the beginning location of each interval. Stepwise model selection identified models that best explained the movement distances of each animal. The behavioral state changed very slowly for most animals (median autocorrelation r = 0.93), and all animals responded strongly to time of day (with more movement in the crepuscular hours). However, the spatial variables included in the best‐fitting models varied substantially among individual elk. These results suggest that strong patterns of habitat selection observed in other studies may result from frequent visits to preferred areas rather than a reduction of movement in those areas.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.221 · 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