MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2991988040 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2019-0061

Male reproductive input, breeding tenure, and turnover in high-density brown bear (<i>Ursus arctos yesoensis</i>) populations on the Shiretoko Peninsula, Hokkaido, Japan

2019· article· en· W2991988040 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michito Shimozuru, Yuri Shirane, Mina Jimbo, Masami Yamanaka, Masanao Nakanishi, Tsuyoshi Ishinazaka, Shinsuke Kasai, Takane Nose, Yasushi Fujimoto, Hifumi Tsuruga, Tsutomu Mano, Toshio Tsubota

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrsusBiologyPeninsulaWildlifeLitterReproductionPopulationZoologyEcologyReproductive successOffspringWildlife managementRange (aeronautics)DemographyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Male reproductive behavior has not been thoroughly investigated in large, non-social mammals. We studied male reproductive input using field observations and microsatellite DNA data for the brown bear (Ursus arctos yesoensis Lydekker, 1897) population in a special wildlife protection area on the Shiretoko Peninsula in Hokkaido, Japan. We identified the father of 82 offspring born between 2006 and 2018 from 54 litters produced by 20 females and revealed that they were sired by a total of 19 males. Overall, paternity was distributed relatively evenly among different males, although litter production tended to be skewed to a few bears in some years. Male breeding tenure varied among individuals, but most tenures were within the range of 1 to 6 years. Human-caused mortality, mostly occurring near human residential areas, induced male turnover, indicating that the special wildlife protection area located in the inner part of the Shiretoko Peninsula is not free from human impact. The frequency of successful reproduction was highest in 10- to 14-year-old bears, which is consistent with the period when males reach physical maturity. These results contribute to an understanding of breeding systems in large solitary mammals and to appropriate conservation and management strategies for brown bear populations.

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)0.000
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicWildlife Ecology and Conservation→French-language works237,207→