MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4280649557 · doi:10.1002/wsb.1266

Occurrence patterns of wild turkeys altered by wild pigs

2022· article· en· W4280649557 on OpenAlexaff
Clay M. Walters, Douglas C. Osborne

Bibliographic record

VenueWildlife Society Bulletin · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeleagris gallopavoWildlifeHunting seasonWild boarInterspecific competitionHabitatBiologyCamera trapOccupancyAnimal scienceVeterinary medicineWildlife managementWildlife conservationEcologyZoologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Eastern wild turkeys ( Meleagris gallopavo silvestris ) are an important game bird in the United States, particularly in the Southeast. The introduction of wild pigs ( Sus scrofa ) can negatively affect native wildlife, habitat quality, and ecosystem functions. To explore the potential effects that pig presence, through habitat degradation and interspecific competition, may have on wild turkeys, we evaluated changes in occupancy of co‐occurring wild pigs and wild turkeys.We deployed camera‐monitored bait stations on 3 wildlife management areas in Arkansas during January–April 2017–2019 and collected >680,000 images to determine turkey and wild pig occurrence. We evaluated presence/absence of turkeys and wild pigs in camera trap images using Timelapse2 image analyzer software® and then used program MARK to create 2‐species occupancy models and determine the effect of wild pig presence and various landscape covariates on the occupancy and detectability of wild turkeys. The occupancy rate of wild pigs was 50.4% (95% CI = 46.9%–54.0%) and included positive relationships with the percent cover of deciduous forest and the number of wildlife openings within 500 m. The occupancy rate of turkeys increased from 45.5% (95% CI = 39.3%–51.6%) when wild pigs were not present to 59.4% (95% CI = 45.2%–73.5%, 95%) when wild pigs were present, indicating a tendency of the 2 species to select for similar environmental conditions (Species Interaction Factor = 1.13). Detectability of turkeys decreased when wild pigs occupied a site at any point during the season, regardless of whether or not the wild pigs were detected during the same trapping occasion. The decrease in detectability suggests a possible short‐term displacement of turkeys by wild pigs. This displacement can have indirect effects through alteration of breeding behaviors and altered habitat use patterns, and these indirect effects represent an important topic for research moving forward.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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