MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4241932486 · doi:10.24124/2011/bpgub717

Interrelationships between weather, parasitic insects, and barren-ground caribou (Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus) behaviour in Northwest Territories and Nunavut.

2011· dissertation· en· W4241932486 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Leslie A. Witter

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsContext (archaeology)EcologyPredationBiologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Bathurst barren-ground caribou (Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus) herd decreased by 90% from 1986-2009. Increased intensity of insect harassment due to climatic warming is hypothesized as a factor contributing to the decline. I monitored weather, trapped insects, and recorded caribou behavior during 2007-2009. Oestrid fly (Oestridae) presence, and mosquito (Culicidae) and black fly (Simuliidae) activity/abundance were best explained by temperature, wind speed, light intensity, barometric pressure, relative humidity, vegetation, topography, and location. Time of day and growing degree days also affected mosquito and black fly levels. Conditions favouring mosquito activity declined, while those favouring black and oestrid fly activity increased since the mid 1980s. Mosquitoes had relatively little effect on caribou behavior. Insect avoidance increased when oestrids were present or black flies were active at moderate-high levels. Understanding differential effects of macroparasites on Rangifer behavior is necessary to predict herd dynamics in the context of a changing climate across northern Canada. --P.ii.

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 score0.233
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWildlife Ecology and Conservation→French-language works237,207→