MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3159657363 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2020-0296

Population dynamics of muskrats (<i>Ondatra zibethicus</i>) and American mink (<i>Neovison vison</i>): investigating contemporary patterns in a classic predator–prey system

2021· article· en· W3159657363 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Adam A. Ahlers, T. P. Lyons, Edward Heske

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
KeywordsAmerican minkBiologyPredatorPredationMinkPopulationPopulation cycleEcologyDensity dependenceRange (aeronautics)ZoologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A well-studied predator–prey relationship between American mink (Neovison vison (Schreber, 1777); formerly known as Mustela vison Schreber, 1777) and muskrats (Ondatra zibethicus (Linnaeus, 1766)) in Canada has advanced our understanding of population cycles including the influence of density dependence and lagged responses of predators to prey abundances. However, it is unclear if patterns observed in Canada extend across the southern half of their native range. We used data from the United States to create a 41-year time series of mink and muskrat harvest reports (1970–2011) for 36 states. After controlling for pelt-price effects, we used second-order autoregressive and Lomb–Scargle spectral density models to identify the presence and periodicity of muskrat population cycles. Additionally, we tested for evidence of delayed or direct density dependence and for predator-driven population dynamics. Our results suggest muskrat populations may cycle in parts of the United States; however, results varied by modeling approaches with Lomb–Scargle analyses providing more precise parameter estimates. Observed cycle lengths were longer than expected with weak amplitudes and we urge caution when interpreting these results. We did not detect evidence of a predator–prey relationship driven by a lagged numerical response of American mink. American mink and muskrat fur returns were largely correlated across the region suggesting extraneous factors likely synchronize both 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 score0.265
Threshold uncertainty score0.527

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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