The effects of maternal penning on the movement ecology of mountain caribou
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Translocation and captivity are important tools for conservation biology and wildlife management. Understanding the movement ecology of animals following their release in novel terrain is critical to predicting the success of wildlife restoration efforts. Mountain caribou have high conservation value – efforts to restore their populations across western Canada involve hundreds of millions of dollars in science, monitoring, and management activity. Here, we examined the movements of adult female caribou ( N = 36) following their translocation to, and release from, a maternity pen (‘penned caribou’) and compared these movements to animals that were not translocated (‘unpenned caribou’, N = 22). A maternity pen is a temporary holding facility, within the animals’ existing range, that enables them to bear and raise their young in the absence of predators and with augmented resources. Penned and unpenned animals had similar home range sizes (1052.2 and 1314.6 km 2 , respectively, P = 0.46) though penned animals moved through the landscape in a faster yet less directed manner. We found some evidence that memory may improve the efficiency of space use. Home ranges with higher quality habitats tended to be smaller than home ranges with poorer quality habitats irrespective of penning status. Penned animals ranged at lower elevation (~150 m) than unpenned animals, particularly in spring and early winter. For penned animals, we did not detect evidence of homing back to the original capture site. The best predictor of how caribou will use the landscape appears to be proximity to the location of the release site. To maximize the fitness of released caribou, future plans for maternity pens and captive breeding programs need to consider the management of food, predators, and habitat across the 1000–2000 km 2 that will form the home range near the release site.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".