MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2800064724 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2017-0314

Movement-based methods to infer parturition events in migratory ungulates

2018· article· en· W2800064724 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Matthew D. Cameron, Kyle Joly, Greg A. Breed, Lincoln S. Parrett, Knut Kielland

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlaska Department of Fish and GameNational Park ServiceMassachusetts Department of Fish and Game
KeywordsUngulateWoodland caribouIce calvingBiologyRange (aeronautics)PopulationAerial surveyHerdEcologyHabitatGeographyDemographyCartographyLactationPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long-distance migrations by ungulate species are a globally imperiled natural phenomenon and conservation of them requires monitoring population vital rates. Satellite telemetry tracking is widely used for understanding the spatial distribution and movement of animals, especially migratory animals in remote environments. Recently, analytical methods have been developed to infer parturition events from movement data in multiple species that calve in isolation, but to date such methods have not been tested on animals that both migrate and spatially aggregate during calving. We applied two movement-based methods developed to infer parturition in nonmigratory woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou (Gmelin, 1788)) to 241 reproductive seasons spanning 6 years of GPS data from migratory barren-ground caribou (Rangifer tarandus granti J.A. Allen, 1902). We compared results from both methods to data from aerial surveys of collared females during the calving period. We found that each movement-based method had ∼80% overall accuracy to identify calving events, with interannual variation ranging from 61% to 100%. When we considered instances when the two analytical methods agreed on parturition outcome, the accuracy increased to 89% with an annual range of 73%–100%. Using these methods, we identified marked interannual differences in peak calving dates and higher parturition rates than previously reported for this caribou herd. The successful application of these analyses to a migratory, gregarious ungulate suggests a broader applicability of the methodology.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations23
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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