MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2769908744 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2017-0090

The distribution and trophic ecology of an introduced, insular population of red-necked wallabies (<i>Notamacropus</i> <i>rufogriseus</i>)

2017· article· en· W2769908744 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Paige Havlin, Anthony Caravaggi, W. Ian Montgomery

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyEcologyRange (aeronautics)PopulationInterspecific competitionNicheEcological nicheCompetition (biology)Trophic levelPopulation densityHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduced non-native mammals can have negative impacts on native biota and it is important that their ecologies are quantified so that potential impacts can be understood. Red-necked wallabies (Notamacropus rufogriseus (Desmarest, 1817)) became established on the Isle of Man (IOM), an island with UNESCO Biosphere status, following their escape from zoological collections in the mid-1900s. We estimated wallaby circadial activity and population densities using camera trap surveys and random encounter models. Their range in the IOM was derived from public sightings sourced via social media. Wallaby diet and niche breadth were quantified via microscopic examination of faecal material and compared with those of the European hare (Lepus europaeus Pallas, 1778). The mean (±SE) population density was 26.4 ± 6.9 wallabies/km2, the mean (±SE) population size was 1742 ± 455 individuals, and the species’ range was 282 km2, comprising 49% of the island. Wallaby diets were dominated by grasses, sedges, and rushes; niche breadth of wallabies and hares (0.55 and 0.59, respectively) and overlap (0.60) suggest some potential for interspecific competition and (or) synergistic impacts on rare or vulnerable plant species. The IOM wallaby population is understudied and additional research is required to further describe population parameters, potential impacts on species of conservation interest, and direct and indirect economic costs and benefits.

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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicWildlife Ecology and Conservation→French-language works237,207→