Evaluating potential sources of invasive wild pigs in Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Invasive wild pigs (Sus scrofa) are considered one of the most damaging species globally, and once they become established in an area, they are notoriously difficult to eliminate. As such, identifying the potential pathways of invasion, especially in places with emerging populations, is critical for preventing new or continued invasion. Wild pigs have been reported in Ontario, Canada, in recent years. We tested four nonexclusive hypotheses about the source of wild pigs in Ontario: (a) escapees from captive sources within Ontario; (b) invasion from neighboring jurisdictions; (c) existing wild populations within Ontario; and (d) translocation and illegal release. We found that sightings of Eurasian wild boar were closer to premises with wild boar than were random locations; wild boar sightings were an average of 16.3 km (SD = 25.4 km, min = 0.2 km,n = 20) from premises with wild boar. We also found that sightings of domestic pigs were closer to domestic pig farms than expected. Sightings of wild pigs in groups of more than four animals were rare. Our results suggest that wild pigs observed in Ontario are recent escapes from captivity, recognizing that there may be established groups of wild pigs that we have not yet detected. While not common, we also received reports indicating that in the past, wild pigs have been translocated and illegally released. Other North American jurisdictions that have been successful at eliminating wild pigs have removed existing populations and changed regulations to limit future invasion, such as prohibiting possession and transport of wild boar and prohibiting hunting of wild pigs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".