MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390770515 · doi:10.1017/9781805430551.021

What About the Coywolf?

2023· other· en· W4390770515 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobalization and political ideologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION In the early 1900s, a unique wolf-like canid1 first appeared in the forested and agricultural landscapes of north-eastern North America. Later it appeared more frequently in large cities of the region, such as Toronto, Boston and New York City. Considerable debate ensued over the ancestry and taxonomy of the new north-eastern canid. Early observers recognised that this newcomer was too small to be a grey wolf ( Canis lupus ) or an eastern timber wolf ( Canis lycaon ), but too large to be a coyote ( Canis latrans ). Scientists, wildlife managers and the lay public were quick to label these mid-sized animals as coyote-dog hybrids or ‘coydogs’ (Carson 1962; RC 1952; Aldous 1939). However, later evidence suggested that the enigmatic canids were predominantly coyote with some unknown amount of wolf and dog ancestry (Lawrence and Bossert 1969; Kolenosky 1971; Bekoff 1977). Despite the widespread occurrence of hybrids with varying degrees of coyote and wolf ancestry in the eastern half of North America, the term coywolf has only been applied to wild canids with a genetic composition that is predominantly coyote and which inhabit the north-eastern quadrant of the continent. In both the scientific and popular literature, the new north-eastern canids have gone by many names: coyote , eastern coyote , north-eastern coyote , New England Canis , tweed wolf , coydog and coywolf . The latter term coywolf is more recent. Although coywolf has been popularised by the news media and is primarily used by the wildlife biologist who coined the term (Way 2009a), the name lacks support and has not been adopted by other wildlife biologists. Therefore, hereafter I use the term north-eastern (NE) coyote referring to the admixed wild canid with predominantly coyote ancestry that has recently expanded into north-eastern North America. In this chapter, I (1) outline the earliest and most recent genetic discoveries regarding the complex ancestry of NE coyotes, (2) highlight key morphological and dietary distinctions of NE coyotes as compared to coyotes in other geographic regions, and (3) discuss how the presence of NE coyotes in various cities informs the conservation conversation regarding coexistence between humans and wolf-like predators.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.464
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0220.005

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGlobalization and political ideologiesFrench-language works237,207