Effects of release method on the survival, somatic growth, and body condition of headstarted turtles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Headstarting involves ex situ rearing of vulnerable life stages, then releasing individuals into the wild once they are larger and less vulnerable to predation. Sometimes, headstarted animals display underdeveloped behaviors that may lead to an acclimation period of reduced survival and growth after release. Using data from a 6‐year headstarting program, we tested whether the early release condition affected survival, body condition, and somatic growth rate in 2 groups of headstarted Blanding's turtles (Emydoidea blandingii) released into Rouge National Urban Park (RNUP) in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. The first group included turtles released directly into the wild (i.e., hard release). The second group included turtles released into an in situ enclosure in which individuals remained for a week without food supplementation before being fully released into the wild (i.e., delayed release). Release condition did not affect survival or growth rate. In the delayed‐release group, body condition initially declined rapidly and remained low for up to 1 year after release. Given the lack of wild juveniles in RNUP, we compared body condition of headstarted turtles at various time points since release to similar‐sized wild juveniles from 2 other Ontario populations, one from Algonquin Provincial Park (APP) and one near Lake Erie (LE). Body condition of headstarted turtles was similar to those of wild APP turtles regardless of release method, and higher than those of wild LE turtles. Our results indicate that delayed release did not improve post‐release outcomes for headstarted turtles in an urban landscape and headstarted turtles sustain similar health metrics as wild turtles.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".