MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790329133 · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2018.01.020

Perils of recovering the Mexican wolf outside of its historical range

2018· article· en· W2790329133 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eric A. Odell, James R. Heffelfinger, Steven S. Rosenstock, Chad J. Bishop, Stewart G. Liley, Alejandro González‐Bernal, Julián A. Velasco, Enrique Martínez‐Meyer

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Conservation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
KeywordsGray wolfSubspeciesGeographyRange (aeronautics)Endangered speciesEcologyCanisBiological dispersalPopulationEthnologyHabitatBiologyDemographyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Mexican wolf (Canis lupus baileyi) was included in the 1973 Endangered Species Act listing of the gray wolf (C. lupus), but then listed separately as a subspecies in 2015. Early accounts of its range included the Sierra Madre Occidental of Mexico, southeastern Arizona, southwestern New Mexico, and sometimes western Texas, supported by ecological, biogeographic, and morphological data. There have been multiple unsuccessful attempts to revise the original 1982 recovery plan and identify areas suitable for Mexican wolf reintroduction. Despite the fact that 90% of its historical range is in Mexico and widespread suitable habitat exists there, previous draft recovery plans recommended recovery mostly outside of Mexico and well north of the subspecies' historical range. Planning recovery outside historical range of this subspecies is fraught with problems that may compromise, thwart, or impede successful recovery. Dispersal of Mexican wolves northward and continued movements southward by Northwestern wolves (C. l. occidentalis), along with allowing establishment of Mexican wolves north of their historical range before they are recovered, may lead to premature and detrimental intraspecific hybridization. Interbreeding of Northwestern wolves from Canadian sources and Mexican wolves does not represent the historical cline of body size and genetic diversity in the Southwest. If Northwestern wolves come to occupy Mexican wolf recovery areas, these physically larger wolves are likely to dominate smaller Mexican wolves and quickly occupy breeding positions, as will their hybrid offspring. Hybrid population(s) thus derived will not contribute towards recovery because they will significantly threaten integrity of the listed entity. Directing Mexican wolf recovery northward outside historical range threatens the genetic integrity and recovery of the subspecies, is inconsistent with the current 10(j) regulations under the ESA, is unnecessary because large tracts of suitable habitat exist within historical range, is inconsistent with the concepts of restoration ecology, and disregards unique characteristics for which the Mexican wolf remains listed.

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)0.000
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 score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.602

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological ConservationSame topicRangeland and Wildlife ManagementFrench-language works237,207