Small reserves around hibernation sites may not adequately protect mobile snakes: the example of Great Basin Gophersnakes (<i>Pituophis catenifer deserticola</i>) in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A common strategy for reptile conservation is to establish reserves around nesting or hibernation sites. The government of British Columbia, Canada, mandates protection of 200–300 ha wildlife habitat areas (WHAs) around hibernation sites of the federally threatened Great Basin Gophersnakes ( Pituophis catenifer deserticola Stejneger, 1893), but practical constraints result in a mean size of 193 ha. To evaluate the efficacy of this reserve size, we radio-tracked 39 adult Gophersnakes at four study sites in the Okanagan Valley in 2006 and 2007. Home ranges averaged 10.5 ± 1.7 ha. The maximum distance traveled from a hibernation site was 2400 m, whereas the maximum distance dispersed averaged 520 ± 65 m. An idealized circular WHA of 193 ha with the hibernation site at the centre would be large enough to contain Gophersnake home ranges, but the dispersal data show that only 85% of snakes would stay within that area. Small or asymmetrical WHAs likely protect even fewer Gophersnake locations. We recommend that WHAs be expanded if possible because the high mobility of Gophersnakes suggests that current reserves may not offer adequate protection.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".