MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799607035 · doi:10.7939/r34s7p

Use of space by caribou in northern Canada

2011· article· en· W2799607035 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpace (punctuation)GeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding how populations are structured and how they use natural and anthropogenic spaces is essential for effective wildlife management. A total of 510 barren-ground (Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus), 176 boreal (R. t. caribou), 11 mountain woodland (R. t. caribou), and 39 island (R. t. groenlandicus x pearyi) caribou were tracked with satellite collars in 1993-2009 in the Northwest Territories, Nunavut, and northern Alberta. Using satellite location data and hierarchical and fuzzy cluster analyses, I verified that Cape Bathurst, Bluenose-West, Bluenose-East, Bathurst, Beverly, Qamanirjuaq, and Lorillard barren-ground subpopulations were robust; the Queen Maude Gulf and Wager Bay barren-ground subpopulations were distinct. Dolphin and Union island caribou formed one population; boreal caribou formed two distinct subpopulations. Females in robust subpopulations were structured by strong annual spatial affiliation; those in distinct subpopulations were spatially independent and structured by migratory connectivity, movement barriers, and/or habitat discontinuity. An east-west cline in annual-range sizes and path lengths supported the subpopulation structure identified for migratory barren-ground caribou. I analyzed satellite location data to determine parturition dates and activity periods for all caribou ecotypes. For parturition dates I found a north-south cline for boreal caribou, west-east cline for migratory barren-ground caribou, and ecotype and subspecies clines for boreal and barren-ground caribou. Based on annual changes in movement rates I identified eight activity periods for boreal and tundra-wintering, 10 for mountain woodland, and 12 for migratory barren-ground caribou. Based distribution and movements, boreal caribou avoided seismic lines during periods when females and calves were most vulnerable to predators or hunters. They crossed fewer seismic lines and travelled faster when they crossed them than expected. Caribou avoided areas ≤400 m from seismic lines where they could space away from them suggesting that they perceive these as risky areas. I defined secure habitats as areas that were >400 m from anthropogenic linear features. Population growth rates were higher in areas where they had access to secure unburned habitat and where most of that was in patches >500 km2. Critical habitat for boreal caribou is a habitat state that provides “security” from predation risk and facilitates the effectiveness of their anti-predator strategies.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.365
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.188 · 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