Critical snow density threshold for Dall’s sheep (<i>Ovis</i> <i>dalli</i> <i>dalli</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Snow cover can significantly impact animal movement and energetics, yet few studies have investigated the link between physical properties of snow and energetic costs. Quantification of thresholds in snow properties that influence animal movement are needed to help address this knowledge gap. Recent population declines of Dall’s sheep (Ovis dalli dalli Nelson, 1884) could be due in part to changing snow conditions. We examined the effect of snow density, snow depth, and snow hardness on sinking depths of Dall’s sheep tracks encountered in Wrangell–St. Elias National Park and Preserve, Alaska. Snow depth was a poor predictor of sinking depths of sheep tracks (R2 = 0.02, p = 0.38), as was mean weighted hardness (R2 = 0.09, p = 0.07). Across competing models, top layer snow density (0–10 cm) and sheep age class were the best predictors of track sink depths (R2 = 0.58). Track sink depth decreased with increasing snow density, and the snowpack supported the mass of a sheep above a density threshold of 329 ± 18 kg/m3 (mean ± SE). This threshold could aid interpretation of winter movement and energetic costs by animals, thus improving our ability to predict consequences of changing snowpack conditions on wildlife.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".