MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036967818 · doi:10.1111/acv.12607

Life on the edge: habitat fragmentation limits expansion of a restored carnivore

2020· article· en· W3036967818 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrew Butler, Kristy Bly, Heather S. Harris, Robert M. Inman, Axel Moehrenschlager, Donelle Schwalm, David S. Jachowski

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Conservation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Fish and Wildlife FoundationClemson UniversityWorld Wildlife Fund
KeywordsCarnivoreFecundityVulpesPopulationGrasslandEcologyBiologyHabitat fragmentationPopulation growthVital ratesLeslie matrixGeographyJuvenileMark and recaptureHabitatDemographyPredation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The successful recovery of imperiled species is dependent on knowledge of how demographic drivers mediate population growth and expansion. One of the largest species restoration projects has been the reintroduction of swift foxes Vulpes velox to southern Canada, where 947 foxes were released between 1983 and 1997. Swift foxes have since increased and expanded their range into northern Montana (USA), but have experienced a population decline and stall in recolonization over the past 10 years. The objective of this study was to estimate the survival and reproductive rates of swift foxes in northern Montana, which constitutes the southern edge of this population. In addition, we evaluated support for two different hypotheses of how environmental factors and several demographic factors influence survival. Although our length of monitoring was relatively short, we found that adult and juvenile annual survival rates were 54% and 74%, respectively, and fecundity was 0.85. We found the most support for the hypothesis that the percentage of native grassland at the 1‐km scale influenced survival and found that survival increased, on average, 2.1% for every 5% increase in grassland. Compared to previous estimates of swift fox population growth immediately following the release, our data suggest the population is currently stable. The long‐term successful recolonization and connectivity of swift fox populations in this region will likely be dependent on maintaining large tracts of contiguous grassland. Comparing the estimates of demographic rates among different points in space and time should help managers better understand the population dynamics and inform restoration strategies for recovering 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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal ConservationSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207