MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884769537 · doi:10.1111/mam.12135

Surplus killing by pumas <i>Puma concolor</i>: rumours and facts

2018· article· en· W2884769537 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
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

VenueMammal Review · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSecretaría de Ciencia y Técnica, Universidad de Buenos AiresSecretaría General de Ciencia y Tecnología , Universidad Nacional del SurUniversidad Nacional del SurInstituto Nacional de Tecnología AgropecuariaConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y TécnicasUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsPumaPredationLivestockCarnivoreEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Surplus killing (i.e. predation in which predators kill more prey than necessary to satiate their hunger) appears to be widespread in carnivores and has the potential to exacerbate human–carnivore conflict. Nevertheless, little is known about the frequency of surplus killing or about its impact on livestock. We review the information available on surplus killing by pumas Puma concolor and use data from central Argentina to quantify its impact on ranching and to analyse both its causes and its implications for puma–human conflicts. We reviewed 73 publications and found nine mentions of surplus killing events from six countries. The sheep was by far the most commonly affected livestock species. In central Argentina, surplus killing was reported by 25–33% of the ranchers. In this region, the number of livestock killed during each event ranged from seven to 160 (median = 23) for the literature reports and from two to 70 (median = 7) in the records we personally collated. The number of individual animals killed per event was greater for interview‐based second‐hand reports than for first‐hand reports and verified events. Our results indicate that although surplus killing by pumas is uncommonly reported in the literature, it may be locally recurrent. Although surplus killing may be overestimated in interview‐based reports, it can produce significant losses for sheep and goat ranchers, may strongly exacerbate puma–human conflicts, and should be considered in puma–human conflict mitigation strategies. Ranchers typically attributed surplus killing to female pumas teaching kittens to hunt. However, there is little evidence supporting this interpretation. Surplus killing by pumas may be more likely to occur in situations where the predator's ‘normal’ hunting sequence is disrupted by the accessibility of large numbers of easy prey. Confinement, stormy weather and poor antipredator behaviour may favour the occurrence of surplus killing events on livestock.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.562
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)0.0030.001

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 head0.247
Teacher spread0.234 · 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