Vegetation biomass and topography are associated with seasonal habitat selection and fall translocation behavior in Arctic hares
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Habitat selection theory suggests that environmental features selected at coarse scales reveal fundamental factors affecting animal fitness. When these factors vary across seasons, they may lead to large-scale movements, including long-distance seasonal migrations. We analyzed the seasonal habitat selection of 25 satellite-tracked Arctic hares from a population on Ellesmere Island (Nunavut, Canada) that relocated over 100 km in the fall. Since no other lagomorph is known to perform such extensive movements, this population offered an ideal setting to test animal movement and habitat selection theory. On summer grounds hares selected low elevation areas, while on winter grounds they selected high vegetation biomass, high elevation, and steep slopes. During fall relocation, they alternated between stopover and traveling behavioral states (ratio 2:1). Stopover locations were characterized by higher vegetation heterogeneity and lower rugosity than traveling locations, while vegetation biomass and elevation interacted to explain stopover locations in a more complex way. The selected combination of environmental features thus varied across seasons and behavioral states, in a way broadly consistent with predictions based on the changing food and safety needs of hares. Although causality was not demonstrated, our results improve our understanding of long-distance movements and habitat selection in Arctic hares, as well as herbivore ecology in the polar desert. Results also provide strong support to animal movement and habitat selection theory, by showing how some important hypotheses hold when tested in a species phylogenetically distinct from most animal models used in this research field.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".