MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311540090 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/aca8bf

Human and animal movements combine with snow to increase moose-vehicle collisions in winter

2022· article· en· W4311540090 on OpenAlexaff
Calum X. Cunningham, Glen E. Liston, Adele K. Reinking, Natalie T. Boelman, Todd J. Brinkman, Kyle Joly, Mark Hebblewhite, Stan Boutin, Sophie M. Czetwertynski, Leonard Sielecki, Laura R. Prugh

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Transportation of OntarioYukon Department of EnvironmentUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowSnowpackEnvironmental sciencePhysical geographyWildlifeCollisionArcticBorealHabitatGeographyEcologyMeteorologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Wildlife-vehicle collisions imperil humans, wildlife, and property. Collisions with moose (Alces alces) are especially consequential and there are indications they may increase during severe winters. We tested hypotheses regarding the influence of moose movements and vehicular traffic patterns on collision risk. We first modeled daily snow depth and accumulation across 5.6 million km2 of the North American Arctic-Boreal region. Next, we analyzed the movements and road use of 113 GPS-collared moose in response to snow depth. Finally, we examined the influence of these snow properties on vehicular traffic and 7680 moose-vehicle collisions. As winter progressed and the snowpack deepened in each study area, GPS-collared moose migrated to lower elevations, leading them into areas with shallower snow but higher road densities. This elevational migration corresponded with a higher probability of road-use by moose (by up to ten-fold) in winter than in summer. Corresponding to these patterns, moose-vehicle collisions were 2.4–5.7 times more frequent from December through February (compared to early summer). Collision risk was highest when and where snow depth was less than 120 cm, indicating that migration into areas with shallower snow increased collision risk in those areas. Most (82%) moose-vehicle collisions occurred after dark. This pattern was strongest during winter, when nighttime traffic volumes were eight times higher than summer due to longer nights. Overall, our findings suggest that concurrent seasonal changes in human and wildlife behavior increase the frequency of moose-vehicle collisions during winter. Snow depth influences collisions primarily through its impacts on moose movement, while strong seasonal changes in daylight hours cause an increase in nighttime traffic that further contributes to risk. This information may help predict times and places where risk of moose-vehicle collisions are highest and to develop seasonally dynamic mitigation strategies.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207