Habitat Use by Nuttall’s Cottontails (<i>Sylvilagus nuttallii nuttallii</i>) at their Northern Range Edge (British Columbia, Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
in Canada, Nuttall’s Cottontails (Sylvilagus nuttallii nuttallii) occur in southcentral British Columbia (BC), where they are federally listed as a species of special Concern due to their presumed small populations and limited distribution in fragmented habitats. Their habitat use and movement patterns are poorly known at this northern edge of their distribution. We used livetrapping, radio-collaring, and fecal pellet surveys to examine Nuttall’s Cottontails’ use of remaining patches of native habitat as well as use of human-impacted areas. Cottontails were present in low densities and only about half of presumably suitable patches of native sagebrush-steppe were occupied. Cottontails were more likely to occur in shrubby habitat, but at a fine scale cottontails used areas that had a lower density of shrubs and finer substrates. movement patterns differed significantly between areas of varying habitat quality, with longer movements in natural habitat. one radio-collared male cottontail used anthropogenic habitats adjacent to native habitat; this use corresponds with landowner reports. However, it is not clear whether Nuttall’s Cottontails are able to use anthropogenically-impacted areas to maintain populations or in areas where such habitats are not near native habitats. our results suggest that these animals are rare and occur primarily in remnant patches of shrub-steppe within BC.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".