MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092237590 · doi:10.1002/jwmg.21961

Comparison of Woodland Caribou Calving Areas Determined by Movement Patterns Across Northern Ontario

2020· article· en· W3092237590 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Philip D. Walker, Arthur Rodgers, Jennifer L. Shuter, Ian D. Thompson, John M. Fryxell, John G. Cook, Rachel C. Cook, Eveyln H. Merrill

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphOntario Forest Research InstituteUniversity of AlbertaNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest ServiceMinistry of Energy, Northern Development and MinesMinistry of Natural Resources and Forestry
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWoodland caribouIce calvingGeographyPopulationDemographyBorealEcologyBiologyPregnancyLactation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Adult female survival and calf recruitment influence population dynamics, but there is limited information on calving and neonatal mortality of boreal woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou; caribou) in Ontario, Canada. We identified calf parturition sites and 5‐week neonatal mortality using a movement‐based approach across 3 northern Ontario study regions (Pickle Lake, Nakina, and Cochrane) that vary in their capacity to support caribou populations. In comparing 22 caribou‐years of video‐collar footage during 2010–2013 to predictions of the movement‐based approach, we found live parturition events were 100% correctly classified, date of parturition was within 1.08 ± 0.28 ( ± SE) days, and mortality events up to 5 weeks postpartum were 88% correctly classified. Across study regions, 87% of 186 caribou were pregnant and 76% of 107 caribou‐years indicated birth events with median parturition dates a week later in Cochrane (23 May) than in Pickle Lake (17 May) and Nakina (16 May). Based on selection ratios of caribou‐years with calves‐at‐heel (n = 80), caribou consistently selected for lowlands and closed‐canopied forests and mostly against early‐seral stands (<20 yrs old) and areas near linear features during the neonatal and the post‐neonatal period (up to 35 days postpartum). Based on the video footage and movement models, 30% of 81 caribou‐years that indicated live births also showed females lost their calf within the first 5 weeks postpartum, with higher risk of neonatal mortality associated with increased use of lowlands and greater postpartum movement rates. This study provides informative metrics of caribou reproduction across northern Ontario that will contribute to future population modeling and identifies important landscape features to be considered in future industrial development and land use planning for caribou conservation. © 2020 The Wildlife Society.

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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wildlife ManagementSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207