Demography of snowshoe hare population cycles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cyclic fluctuations in abundance exhibited by some mammalian populations in northern habitats ("population cycles") are key processes in the functioning of many boreal and tundra ecosystems. Understanding population cycles, essentially demographic processes, necessitates discerning the demographic mechanisms that underlie numerical changes. Using mark-recapture data spanning five population cycles (1977-2017), we examined demographic mechanisms underlying the 9-10-yr cycles exhibited by snowshoe hares (Lepus americanus Erxleben) in southwestern Yukon, Canada. Snowshoe hare populations always decreased during winter and increased during summer; the balance between winter declines and summer increases characterized the four, multiyear cyclic phases: increase, peak, decline, and low. Little or no recruitment occurred during winter, but summer recruitment varied markedly across the four phases with the highest and lowest recruitment observed during the increase and decline phase, respectively. Population crashes during the decline were triggered by a substantial decline in winter survival and by a lack of subsequent summer recruitment. In contrast, initiation of the increase phase was triggered by a twofold increase in summer recruitment abetted secondarily by improvements in subsequent winter survival. We show that differences in peak density across cycles are explained by differences in overall population growth rate, amount of time available for population growth to occur, and starting population density. Demographic mechanisms underlying snowshoe hare population cycles were consistent across cycles in our study site but we do not yet know if similar demographic processes underlie population cycles in other northern snowshoe hare 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".