MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990142110

Busy Beavers in the Big City: An Analysis of Beaver Distribution, Foraging and Non-lethal Forage Management in Urban Riverine Forests

2020· dissertation· en· W2990142110 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kirby England

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan) · 2020
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and biodiversity studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeaverForagingForageCastor canadensisGeographyEcologyForestryBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Where human and beaver populations overlap in cities, conflicts can arise over the beavers’ impact to woody vegetation and river valley infrastructure. One way that cities reduce beavers exploitation of limited shared resources is using non-lethal deterrents, like tree enclosures. Beaver foraging behaviour is well studied in natural systems, with decades of research describing their feeding behaviour and interactions with the woody vegetation community. In comparison, there is a poor understanding of beaver foraging behaviour in urban areas, and effectiveness of forage deterrents. My thesis helps to address this research gap. During late summer and fall of 2017, a survey of beaver lodge distribution and an inventory of riparian woody vegetation, as impacted by beavers, were completed on two reaches of the South Saskatchewan River. One river reach (24 km) passed through the City of Saskatoon where there is active beaver management; the second river reach (29 km) was the adjacent upstream conservation area where there is no beaver management. In City parks the effectiveness of a non-lethal forage deterrent use – tree enclosures - was assessed in May 2018. Results from the beaver activity surveys show that lodge complex density is 56% lower in the city reach; lodges active at the time of the inventory had a dispersed spatial distribution. The riparian woody vegetation community along the two river reaches is markedly different, with more than twice the species richness for both trees and shrubs in the city reach. Much of the enhanced plant diversity can be attributed to introduced woody species. Beaver prefer cottonwoods (Populus spp.), as evidenced by high foraging of this taxa in the unmanaged reach. But, in the managed reach, cottonwood trees are protected. Thus beavers shifted their foraging efforts to Manitoba maple and green ash. The City of Saskatoon is currently using four primary materials for construction tree enclosures. Wire-mesh in various gauges and patterns have an overall 80% effectiveness in deterring further beaver foraging, but chicken wire performs poorest as it girdles trees. Overall, this research contributes to the understanding of urban beaver foraging patterns and preferences within river valley forests. In addition, this research provides land and resource managers with evidence and suggestions regarding the appropriate use of wire-wrapping as a non-lethal beaver deterrent technique.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.269
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan)Same topicEcology and biodiversity studiesFrench-language works237,207