State-dependent foraging by caribou with different nutritional requirements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Foraging by animals is hypothesized to be state-dependent, that is, varying with physiological condition of individuals. State often is defined by energy reserves, but state also can reflect differences in nutritional requirements (e.g., for reproduction, lactation, growth, etc.). Testing hypotheses about state-dependent foraging in ungulates is difficult because fine-scale data needed to evaluate these hypotheses generally are lacking. To evaluate whether foraging by caribou (Rangifer tarandus) was state-dependent, we compared bite and intake rates, travel rates, dietary quality, forage selection, daily foraging time, and foraging strategies of caribou with three levels of nutritional requirements (lactating adults, nonlactating adults, subadults 1–2 years old). Only daily foraging times and daily nutrient intakes differed among nutritional classes of caribou. Lactating caribou foraged longer per day than nonlactating caribou—a difference that was greatest at the highest rates of intake, but which persisted even when intake was below requirements. Further, at sites where caribou achieved high rates of intake, caribou in each nutritional class continued foraging even after satisfying daily nutritional requirements, which was consistent with a foraging strategy to maximize energy intake. Foraging time by caribou was partially state-dependent, highlighting the importance of accounting for physiological state in studies of animal behavior. Fine-scale foraging behaviors may influence larger-scale behavioral strategies, with potential implications for conservation and management.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".