MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2920749034 · doi:10.5070/v419110212

The use of bone oil (renardine) as a coyote repellent on sheep farms in Ontario

2000· article· en· W2920749034 on OpenAlexafffundabout
John G. Martin, Anita O'Brien

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings - Vertebrate Pest Conference · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
FundersOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsFlockAnimal scienceOdorToxicologyVeterinary medicineBiologyEcologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As no control methods, apart from shooting and leghold traps, are legal in Southern Ontario, field trials of lithium chloride and bone oil ("Renardine") were carried out between 1991 and 1998. No effect could be demonstrated with lithium chloride. Between 1994 and 1998 bone oil was used as a repellent on seven different flocks, either directly onto the sheep or as a perimeter barrier round pastures. As long as the treatment was maintained, repulsion was achieved. The coyotes continued to kill in the surrounding area. If the odor level was not maintained, the coyotes would return to kill in the trial flocks. A slow release method for perimeter treatment was tried.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
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)0.0060.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.186 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2000
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings - Vertebrate Pest ConferenceSame topicAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207