MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2760857560

YUKON MOOSE: I. SEASONAL RESOURCE SELECTION BY MALES AND FEMALES IN A MULTI-PREDATOR BOREAL ECOSYSTEM

2017· article· en· W2760857560 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alice M. McCulley, Katherine L. Parker, Michael P. Gillingham

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBorealPredatorEcosystemEcologySelection (genetic algorithm)Resource (disambiguation)GeographyEnvironmental scienceBoreal ecosystemApex predatorTaigaPredationBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Moose (Alces alces) in Yukon experience an extreme range of thermal conditions, highly variable snow depths, natural and anthropogenic disturbances, predation by wolves and grizzly bears, and hunting pressure. Our objective was to identify variables that best explained habitat-selection patterns of moose in south-central Yukon for use in land-use planning and impact assessment. We evaluated selection of land-cover class, elevation, aspect, predation risk, and harvest vulnerability using resource selection functions. We created pooled models for males and females by averaging models for individuals by sex and season. Selection of shrub-dominated land cover highlighted the importance of forage accessibility throughout the year. Selection for elevation, aspect, and cover changed throughout the year, as influenced by climatic conditions. By selecting mixed cover types during calving and summer, female moose presumably balanced needs for both cover and forage. Males minimized harvest vulnerability during rut. Moose, in general, demonstrated highly variable habitat selection; however, consistent individual responses between sexes supported trends identified by pooled selection coefficients, as well as detected trends among males and females. The greatest amount of individual variation occurred during the growing season and the least amount during late winter, suggesting that climatic factors limited the options available to moose at a critical time of the year.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicWildlife Ecology and Conservation→French-language works237,207→