Aspen parkland pasture altered by Richardson’s Ground Squirrel (<em>Urocitellus richardsonii</em> Sabine) activity: the good, the bad, and the not so ugly?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although Richardson’s Ground Squirrels (Urocitellus richardsonii) are considered pests throughout their North American range, their impact on forage in Canadian aspen parkland has not been explored. We investigated the effect of Richardson’s Ground Squirrel density on forage quality and plant community composition in an intensely grazed cattle pasture in the aspen parkland region of Manitoba, Canada. We detected no significant differences in forage protein content or legume, grass, and litter biomass among ground squirrel density levels. However, ground squirrel density did influence the abundance of invasive and forage plant species; greater squirrel density reduced the prevalence of Smooth Brome (Bromus inermis Leysser) and Red Clover (Trifolium pratense L.) and increased the abundance of Quackgrass (Elymus repens (L.) Gould) and Black medick (Medicago lupulina L.). Plant community diversity also increased with ground squirrel density. There were no differences in soil bulk density or ammonia content among squirrel density levels; however, soil nitrate content was highest at low ground squirrel density. Changes in available soil nitrogen and relative abundances of forage species on this pasture may affect cattle diet by altering both the availability and quality of forage. Our findings highlight the need for further investigation of the role of Richardson’s Ground Squirrel on rangeland in the aspen parkland region to ascertain the generality of the effects documented in our study. Until such effects and their implications for cattle production are understood, land managers should refrain from exterminating colonies of Richardson’s Ground Squirrel.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".