MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3169181888 · doi:10.1002/rse2.222

Simultaneous monitoring of vegetation dynamics and wildlife activity with camera traps to assess habitat change

2021· article· en· W3169181888 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Catherine Sun, Christopher Beirne, Joanna M. Burgar, Thomas Howey, Jason T. Fisher, A. Cole Burton

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaMitacsSuncor Energy IncorporatedConocoPhillips
KeywordsVegetation (pathology)WildlifeHabitatEnvironmental scienceUnderstoryEcologyRestoration ecologyWoodland caribouOdocoileusGeographyCanopyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Vegetation phenology and productivity drive resource use by wildlife. Vegetation dynamics also reveal patterns of habitat disturbance and recovery. Monitoring these fine‐scale vegetation patterns over large spatiotemporal extents can be difficult, but camera traps (CTs) commonly used to survey wildlife populations also collect data on local habitat conditions. We used CTs (n = 73) from 2016 to 2019 to assess impacts of habitat change in a boreal landscape of northern Canada, where seismic lines for petroleum exploration disturbed wildlife habitat and prompted vegetation restoration efforts. First, we quantified vegetation dynamics from CTs, comparing them to satellite‐based estimates that are typically used to monitor vegetation at broad spatial scales. We then used understory phenology and productivity estimated from CT time‐lapse images to assess vegetation recovery on seismic lines. Finally, we related vegetation dynamics with the habitat use of three wildlife species: sandhill cranes Grus canadensis , woodland caribou Rangifer tarandus , and white‐tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus . CTs provided unique insight into vegetation dynamics that were different from signals measured by satellites, with temporally inconsistent and even some negative correlations between CT and satellite metrics. We found some indication of vegetation recovery on seismic lines that had received restoration treatment, with understory patterns more similar to undisturbed habitat than to seismic lines that did not receive restoration treatment. CTs also provided inferences about wildlife activity related to vegetation resources, which approaches using satellite data failed to detect. Wildlife habitat use tracked vegetation phenology, but did not always increase with vegetation productivity at weekly, 16‐day, or annual intervals. Instead, associations with vegetation productivity depended on species, temporal scale, and productivity metrics. Given the widespread and growing use of CTs to monitor terrestrial wildlife, we recommend their use to simultaneously monitor habitat conditions to better understand the mechanisms that govern wildlife habitat use in changing environments.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations36
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote Sensing in Ecology and ConservationSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207