MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3148581021 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2020-0073

Landscape use by fishers (<i>Pekania pennanti</i>): core areas differ in habitat than the entire home range

2021· article· en· W3148581021 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jennifer Kordosky, Eric M. Gese, Craig M. Thompson, Patricia A. Terletzky, Kathryn L. Purcell, Jon D. Schneiderman

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHome rangeHabitatEcologyRange (aeronautics)PopulationHabitat fragmentationGeographyCanopyHabitat destructionFragmentation (computing)Population densityTree canopyBiologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Home ranges have long been studied in animal ecology. Core areas may be used at a greater proportion than the rest of the home range, implying the core contains dependable resources. The Pacific fisher (Pekania pennanti (Erxleben, 1777)) is a rare mesocarnivore occupying a small area in the Sierra Nevada Mountains, California, USA. Once statewide, fishers declined in the 1900s due to trapping, habitat fragmentation, and development. Recently, drought induced by climate change may be affecting this population. We examined space use of fishers in their core versus their home range for levels of anthropogenic modifications (housing density, road density, silvicultural treatments), habitat types, and tree mortality. We found core areas contained more late-successional forest and minimal human activity compared with their territory. Their core had higher levels of dense canopy and higher amounts of conifer cover, while minimizing the amount of buildings, developed habitat, and low canopy cover. Fishers may in effect be seeking refugia by minimizing their exposure to these elements in their core. Conserving landscape components used by fishers in their core areas will be important for the persistence of this isolated population.

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)0.000
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 score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.176 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicWildlife Ecology and Conservation→French-language works237,207→