MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2939360627 · doi:10.1111/acv.12503

Population reinforcement accelerates subadult recruitment rates in an endangered freshwater turtle

2019· article· en· W2939360627 on OpenAlexafffund
Sue Carstairs, James E. Paterson, Kathrin Jäger, Donnell Marie-Leah Gasbarrini, Amy Mui, Christina M. Davy

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Conservation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurtle Biology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityTrent UniversityMinistry of Natural Resources and ForestryOntario Turtle Conservation Centre
FundersEcho Foundation
KeywordsBiologyEndangered speciesAcclimatizationPopulationJuvenileEcologyPredationHabitatWildlifeTurtle (robot)Captive breedingZoologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Wildlife diversity and abundance are declining globally and population reinforcement with captive‐reared animals is a common intervention used to prevent extinctions. Released captive‐reared individuals may undergo an acclimation period before their behavior and success is comparable to wild‐reared individuals because they lack experience with predators, complex habitats and variable environmental conditions. Quantifying post‐release acclimation effects on fitness and behavior is important for maximizing the success of reintroduction programs and for predicting the number of captive‐reared animals required for release. Endangered Blanding's turtles Emydoidea blandingii exhibit low recruitment and may benefit from population reinforcement with captive‐reared, ‘headstarted’ individuals (headstarts). We used 6 years of data to compare survival, growth, habitat use and movement ecology between wild‐hatched juvenile turtles and headstarts reared from eggs rescued from injured females. We found strong evidence of an acclimation effect in headstarts, with lower movement, growth, and survival during the first one to two years post‐release. Following this acclimation period, headstarts had movement, growth and survival similar to wild‐hatched juveniles. Habitat use did not differ between headstarts and wild‐hatched juveniles. We hypothesize that the acclimation period occurred because headstarts were introduced directly into the wild (i.e. ‘hard release’) and that providing additional support before or after release may improve the success of headstarts. Headstarts had a monthly survival probability of 0.89 in the first year post‐release, and 0.98 after the first year post‐release. We estimated that headstarts at our sites have approximately three times higher probability of surviving to 10 years of age, compared to wild‐hatched individuals at other sites. Our results highlight that headstarts should be released into habitat individually rather than in clusters, and highlight the need to investigate whether post‐release mortality of captive‐reared animals could be mitigated by increased acclimation to wild conditions, for example through prerelease periods in outdoor pens.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 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

Citations39
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal ConservationSame topicTurtle Biology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207