MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2271612966 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v129i4.1761

Recent occurrences of wild-origin wolves (<em>Canis</em> spp.) in Canada south of the St. Lawrence River revealed by stable isotope and genetic analysis

2016· article· en· W2271612966 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Donald F. McAlpine, David X. Soto, Linda Y. Rutledge, Tyler J. Wheeldon, Bradley N. White, James P. Goltz, J H Kennedy

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsGovernment of New BrunswickTrent UniversityUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersTrent UniversityMinistère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs
KeywordsGray wolfCanisBiological dispersalIsotope analysisHaplotypeEcologyGeographyBiologyZoologyGenotypePopulationDemographyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A free-ranging canid killed near Caraquet, New Brunswick, Canada, in 2012 exhibited a mitochondrial DNA sequence of Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) origin and a Y-chromosome haplotype of Eastern Wolf (C. lycaon) origin. The animal, which is the first wolf recorded in New Brunswick since 1862, was identified as a Gray–Eastern Wolf hybrid (C. lupus x C. lycaon) based on analysis of its autosomal microsatellite genotype. Stable carbon isotope values (δ13C) suggest that the Caraquet wolf was of wild origin. Likewise, δ13C analysis suggests that a wolf–coyote hybrid killed in Quebec south of the St. Lawrence River in 2002 was also of wild origin. However, δ13C values for a wolf from the same region in 2006 suggest that this animal spent most of its life feeding predominantly on non-wild-source food items. Recent occurrences of wild-origin animals south of the St. Lawrence River demonstrate that wolves are capable of dispersal to formerly occupied areas in southeastern Canada and the United States. However, limited natural dispersal alone will likely not be sufficient to re-establish wolves in northeastern North America.

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 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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.187 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207