Is restocking a useful tool for increasing rabbit densities?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) is endemic to Mediterranean ecosystems in the Iberian Peninsula, where it is a key species. In recent years its populations have declined due to several factors including habitat transformation and viral diseases. At the same time, corrective measures including population restocking in areas with low population densities using rabbits from other geographical areas have been performed. In this study we evaluate the impact restocking has had on the population dynamics of native rabbits in the Doñana National Park. As part of the natural processes monitoring program carried out in the Doñana Biological Station (ESPN-EBD-CSIC), rabbit censuses were conducted in spring and late summer in 2005–2015 at dusk and at night along six fixed transects in habitats harbouring rabbit populations. In order to take into account restocked rabbit numbers, annual reports from the Doñana Natural Area and data provided by the Lynx team of the LIFE project were incorporated into the study. In all, 52 336 rabbits from different parts of western Andalusia were released in the Doñana Biosphere Reserve in 2005–2015. Yet, rabbit populations underwent significant declines, above all in 2013 and 2015, with decreases in some areas of up to 80%. These results show intensive rabbit restocking did not increase the native rabbit populations numbers. The impact of the release of rabbits on the population dynamics of the species in Doñana is discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 it