MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2287706725 · doi:10.7939/r3252z

Relationships between grizzly bear source-sink habitats and prioritized biodiversity sites in Central British Columbia

2011· article· en· W2287706725 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrizzly BearsUrsusHabitatGeographyBiodiversityEcologyPopulationBiotaBorealEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Central Interior and Sub-Boreal Interior ecoprovinces of British Columbia represent an important transitional population of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos L.) occupying the area between two major mountain systems (Coastal Ranges and Central Rockies), as well as defining the boundary of extirpated range in the Fraser Plateau South. To assist ecoregional planning in the area, grizzly bear habitat models were produced for density, mortality risk, and source-sink habitat. Bear density was based on population estimates for each management unit and downscaling approaches using local habitat suitability rankings; mortality risk was modelled using 339 mortality locations from 2004 to 2007 and a suite of environmental and anthropogenic factors as predictors. Both models were combined to form a two-dimensional framework of habitat states representing source-like and sink-like habitats that help prioritize areas for protection and restoration (road decommissioning), respectively, as well as provide a basis for comparing with other biodiversity features. Irreplaceability values based on rare biota and unique habitats measured as the sum of runs in Marxan were significantly higher in grizzly bear source habitats than sink habitats suggesting that protection of grizzly bear source habitats would confer an umbrella or surrogate effect to other biodiversity. keywords: biodiversity; British Columbia; ecoregional planning; grizzly bears; habitat modelling; sourcesink habitats; Ursus arctos.

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)0.000
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.153
Teacher spread0.137 · 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