MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388461149 · doi:10.1002/jwmg.22522

No long‐term effect of black bear removal on elk calf recruitment in the southern Appalachians

2023· article· en· W4388461149 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joseph Yarkovich, Jessica Braunstein, Jennifer M. Mullinax, Joseph D. Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Park ServiceU.S. Geological SurveyRocky Mountain Elk Foundation
KeywordsUrsusNational parkPopulationHunting seasonPredationIce calvingGeographyPopulation declineCervus elaphusOvis canadensisEcologyPer capitaBiologyAnimal scienceFisheryDemographyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In 2001 and 2002, 52 elk ( Cervus canadensis ; 21 males, 31 females), originally obtained from Elk Island National Park, Alberta, Canada, were transported and released into Cataloochee Valley in the northeastern portion of Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GRSM, Park), North Carolina, USA. The annual population growth rate ( λ ) was negative (0.996, 95% CI = 0.945–1.047) and predation by black bears ( Ursus americanus ) on elk calves was identified as an important determinant of population growth. From 2006 to 2008, 49 bears from the primary elk calving area (i.e., Cataloochee Valley) were trapped and translocated about 70 km to the southwestern portion of the Park just prior to elk calving. Per capita recruitment (i.e., the number of calves produced per adult female that survive to 1 year of age) increased from 0.306 prior to bear translocation (2001–2005) to 0.544 during years when bears were translocated (2006–2008) and λ increased to 1.118 (95% CI = 1.096–1.140). Our objective was to determine whether per capita calf recruitment rates after bear removal (2009–2019) at Cataloochee were similar to the higher rates estimated during bear removal (i.e., long‐term response) or if they returned to rates before bear removal (i.e., short‐term response), and how those rates compared with recruitment from portions of our study area where bears were not relocated. We documented 419 potential elk calving events and monitored 129 yearling and adult elk from 2001 to 2019. Known‐fate models based on radio‐telemetry and observational data supported calf recruitment returning to pre‐2006 levels at Cataloochee (short‐term response); recruitment of Cataloochee elk before and after bear relocation was lower (0.184) than during bear relocation (0.492). Recruitment rates of elk outside the removal area during the bear relocation period (0.478) were similar to before and after rates (0.420). In the Cataloochee Valley, cause‐specific annual calf mortality rates due to predation by bears were 0.319 before, 0.120 during, and 0.306 after bear relocation. In contrast, the cause‐specific annual mortality rate of calves in areas where bears were not relocated was 0.033 after the bear relocation period, with no bear predation on calves before or during bear relocation. The mean annual population growth rate for all monitored elk was 1.062 (95% CI = 0.979–1.140) after bear relocation based on the recruitment and survival data. Even though the effects of bear removal were temporary, the relocations were effective in achieving a short‐term increase in elk recruitment, which was important for the reintroduction program given that the elk population was small and vulnerable to extirpation.

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)0.001
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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wildlife ManagementSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207