Seasonal Sea Ice Conditions Affect Caribou Crossing Areas Around Qikiqtaq, Nunavut: Uqsuqtuurmiut Knowledge Guides Ice Chart Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Though polar ecologists consider sea ice primarily as a habitat for marine mammals, caribou use sea ice to complete their reproductive cycles, to access areas with preferred climatic and vegetation conditions, and to avoid predators seasonally and sporadically. Building on previous caribou research in Uqsuqtuuq (Gjoa Haven, Nunavut), we explored the connections between caribou and sea ice phenology in 5 community-identified caribou crossing areas around Qikiqtaq (King William Island). We defined freeze-up and breakup based on Uqsuqtuurmiut (people of Uqsuqtuuq) knowledge of caribou habitat requirements, to orient our analysis to the complex and multifaceted hazards that caribou can encounter while moving through their dynamic and unpredictable sea ice habitat. We investigated the reliability of caribou sea ice habitat surrounding Qikiqtaq, prioritizing key transitional periods with intensified caribou movement. We use regional ice charts produced by the Canadian Ice Service (CIS) and held workshops with Uqsuqtuurmiut to understand how sea ice phenology and caribou mobility have changed over time. The high spatial and temporal variability of sea ice phenology around Qikiqtaq facilitates caribou moving across sea ice should they need to respond to seasonal or unpredictable changes in ecological conditions or anthropogenic disturbance. Therefore, these localized sea ice conditions may increase caribou resiliency to changes or extreme events by providing alternative options for movement across the sea ice. We encourage others to consider the needs of wildlife sea ice users when assessing or providing ice information.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.006 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".