Fine‐scale habitat selection by sympatric Canada lynx and bobcat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
) are closely related species with overlap at their range peripheries, but the factors that limit each species and the interactions between them are not well understood. Habitat selection is a hierarchical process, in which selection at higher orders (geographic range, home range) may constrain selection at lower orders (within the home range). Habitat selection at a very fine scale within the home range has been less studied for both lynx and bobcat compared to selection at broader spatiotemporal scales. To compare this fourth-order habitat selection by the two species in an area of sympatry, we tracked lynx and bobcat during the winters of 2017 and 2018 on the north shore of Lake Huron, Ontario. We found that both lynx and bobcat selected shallower snow, higher snowshoe hare abundance, and higher amounts of coniferous forest at the fourth order. However, the two species were spatially segregated at the second order, and lynx were found in areas with deeper snow, more snowshoe hare, and more coniferous forest. Taken together, our findings demonstrate that the lynx and bobcat select different resources at the second order, assorting along an environmental gradient in the study area, and that competition is unlikely to be occurring between the two species at finer scales.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".