MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281287207 · doi:10.1111/1365-2656.13747

A hierarchical model for jointly assessing ecological and anthropogenic impacts on animal demography

2022· article· en· W4281287207 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Thomas V. Riecke, Benjamin S. Sedinger, Todd W. Arnold, Daniel Gibson, David N. Koons, Madeleine G. Lohman, Michael Schaub, Perry J. Williams, James S. Sedinger

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Ecology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation of Sri LankaDelta WaterfowlInstitute for Wetland and Waterfowl Research, Ducks Unlimited CanadaColorado State University
KeywordsAnasWaterfowlHabitatEcologyPopulationGeographyEnvironmental resource managementBiologyEnvironmental scienceDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The management of sustainable harvest of animal populations is of great ecological and conservation importance. Development of formal quantitative tools to estimate and mitigate the impacts of harvest on animal populations has positively impacted conservation efforts. The vast majority of existing harvest models, however, do not simultaneously estimate ecological and harvest impacts on demographic parameters and population trends. Given that the impacts of ecological drivers are often equal to or greater than the effects of harvest, and can covary with harvest, this disconnect has the potential to lead to flawed inference. In this study, we used Bayesian hierarchical models and a 43-year capture-mark-recovery dataset from 404,241 female mallards Anas platyrhynchos released in the North American midcontinent to estimate mallard demographic parameters. Furthermore, we model the dynamics of waterfowl hunters and habitat, and the direct and indirect effects of anthropogenic and ecological processes on mallard demographic parameters. We demonstrate that density dependence, habitat conditions and harvest can simultaneously impact demographic parameters of female mallards, and discuss implications for existing and future harvest management models. Our results demonstrate the importance of controlling for multicollinearity among demographic drivers in harvest management models, and provide evidence for multiple mechanisms that lead to partial compensation of mallard harvest. We provide a novel model structure to assess these relationships that may allow for improved inference and prediction in future iterations of harvest management models across taxa.

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)0.001
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations40
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal EcologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207