MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2528755260 · doi:10.1002/jwmg.21174

Manipulations of black bear and coyote affect caribou calf survival

2016· article· en· W2528755260 on OpenAlexaffabout
Keith P. Lewis, Stephen E. Gullage, David A. Fifield, David Jennings, Shane P. Mahoney

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsDepartment of Environment and ConservationGovernment of Newfoundland and Labrador
FundersInnovative Research Group Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsUrsusCanisPredationPopulationIce calvingWoodland caribouBiologyWildlifeHunting seasonAnimal scienceWildlife managementEcologyDemographyLactation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The population of woodland caribou ( Rangifer tarandus ) in Newfoundland declined from approximately 94,000 to 32,000 animals between 1996 and 2013. Poor calf survival was the primary cause of the population decline, largely because of predation of newborn calves by American black bear ( Ursus americanus ) and the non‐native coyote ( Canis latrans ). This situation offered an opportunity to test the efficacy of preventative management options such as diversionary feeding and lethal removal of predators for improving calf survival. We monitored caribou calves ( n = 536) in 4 calving areas (3 untreated, 1 treatment) for 2 years (2008–2009) followed by diversionary feeding of black bears and coyotes in 2010–2011 and lethal removal of coyotes in 2012–2013. We estimated calf survival for 70 days, the period calves and females remain on the calving grounds, and for 182 days, after which calves were considered recruited into the population. Calf survival was nearly constant over the 6‐year study period on the untreated areas. Calf survival was initially lower on the treatment area compared to the untreated areas but increased substantially on the treatment area during the lethal removal period, especially during the initial 70‐day period. Predation on calves by coyote decreased substantially during the lethal removal period. Diversionary feeding had little influence on survival rates. This study suggests that lethal removal of coyotes could be a viable management option for improving calf survival, but it is expensive and logistically challenging in remote field settings. © 2016 The Wildlife Society.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.233
Teacher spread0.218 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations56
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wildlife ManagementSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207