MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176498924 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v135i1.2165

Use of Whitebark Pine (<i>Pinus albicaulis</i>) seeds by GPS-collared Grizzly Bears (<i>Ursus arctos</i>) in Banff National Park, Alberta

2021· article· en· W3176498924 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
David Hamer

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsCanmore Museum and Geoscience Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrizzly BearsUrsusNational parkGeographyHabitatMountain pine beetleEcologyPopulationForestryArchaeologyBiologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seeds of Whitebark Pine (Pinus albicaulis) are a major food for Grizzly Bears (Ursus arctos) in the Yellowstone ecosystem. In Canada, Grizzly Bears are known to eat Whitebark Pine seeds, but little additional information, such as the extent of such use and habitat characteristics of feeding sites, is available. Because Grizzly Bears almost always obtain Whitebark Pine seeds by excavating cones from persistent caching sites (middens) made by Red Squirrels (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus), it is possible to infer Whitebark Pine feeding when bears are located near excavated middens in Whitebark Pine stands. During 2013–2018, I conducted a retrospective study in Banff National Park using data from 23 Grizzly Bears equipped by Parks Canada staff with global positioning system (GPS) collars. My objectives were to use GPS fixes to determine the percentage of these bears that had been located in close proximity to excavated middens containing Whitebark Pine seeds and to describe the habitat at these excavated middens. I linked 15 bears (65%) to excavated middens and, by inference, consumption of Whitebark Pine seeds. Excavated middens occurred on high-elevation (mean 2103 ± 101 [SD] m), steep (mean 26° ± 8°) slopes facing mostly (96%) north through west (0–270°). Use of Whitebark Pine seeds by at least 65% of the 23 studied Grizzly Bears suggests that conservation of Whitebark Pine in Banff National Park would concomitantly benefit the at-risk population of Grizzly Bears.

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 score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.213
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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207