Evaluating trade-offs between forage, biting flies, and footing on habitat selection by wood bison (<i>Bison bison athabascae</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Habitat selection is a behavioural process that ultimately affects animal fitness. Forage availability and predation risk are often studied in the context of habitat selection for large ungulates, while other biological and environmental factors such as insect harassment and footing are less studied. Here we examine trade-offs in summer habitat selection between forage availability for wood bison (Bison bison athabascae Rhoads, 1898) with that of biting-fly harassment and soil firmness, which affects activity budgets and predation risk, respectively, and contrast this to winter when flies are absent and soils frozen. Using path analysis, we demonstrate that graminoid availability was not related to habitat selection in summer, but was positively related to habitat selection in winter. Habitat selection in summer was negatively related to biting-fly abundance and positively related to firmer footing. Our results suggest that bison observe trade-offs in summer between maximizing forage intake and minimizing harassment from that of biting flies, while avoiding areas of soft substrates that affect locomotion and vulnerability to predators. In contrast, during the winter, bison focus on areas with greater graminoid availability. Although forage is a key aspect of habitat selection, our results illustrate the importance of considering direct and indirect effects of multiple biological and environmental factors related to ungulate habitat selection.
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 | 0.001 | 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".