Long distance spruce grouse translocations as an effective means of population recovery in New York
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Species translocations can be an effective tool for population recovery. The spruce grouse (Falcipennis canadensis) is rare at the southeastern extent of its range. In New York, USA, it is endangered, having a geographic range that has decreased more than 70% since 1977 and a remaining population with relatively low genetic diversity. We explored the efficacy of a translocation program by releasing 144 female, 19 male, and 291 young‐of‐year wild‐caught spruce grouse from Canada and Maine, USA, into occupied lowland boreal forest patches in New York from 2013–2019. We radio‐monitored 121 translocated and 93 resident (i.e., New York‐origin) adult grouse and evaluated movements, home range sizes, productivity, and survivorship of both groups. Translocated grouse generally moved nondirectionally across the landscape after release, remaining in the same boreal forest patch or an adjacent patch. Translocated grouse home ranges were stable but were double the area of resident grouse. Clutch and brood sizes of females the season following translocation were similar to resident grouse. Minimizing stress from handling and housing was of paramount importance for successful translocation; grouse held captive in enclosures with natural vegetation for ≤5 days had double the mean annual survivorship of captive grouse held for 6–10 days. One group held captive for 15 days had annual survivorship that approached zero. Translocated grouse that were handled the shortest duration had 72% of the mean annual survivorship of resident grouse. Similarity of life‐history parameters among groups suggests that translocations of wild‐caught galliforms into shrinking populations at range margins may be an effective means of augmenting population numbers and could be a useful tool for reversing declines and promoting population recovery. Long‐term success of spruce grouse translocations with a goal of population recovery in New York may hinge on survivorship meeting target estimates defined in population viability analyses or by the adjustment of target translocation numbers to compensate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".