Temperature drives summer group size dynamics of Eastern Migratory caribou in the Hudson Bay lowlands of Manitoba
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aggregation behavior is pervasive across a broad range of animals and the outcome of this behaviour has both risks and rewards. Large aggregations of animals are a distinctive characteristic of migratory caribou ( Rangifer tarandus (Linnaeus, 1758)), primarily in response to the environment factors such as predation, although caribou may also aggregate during high summer temperatures, likely in an effort to mitigate parasitic biting flies. To see if caribou in the Cape Churchill Caribou Herd of the Eastern Migratory caribou ( Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus (Borowski, 1780)) Designatible Unit, also displayed aggregation behavior in relation to warmer summer temperatures, we collected trail camera photos with associated temperature readings during the summer period (May to September) from 2017 to 2020 in their summer range in Wapusk National Park, Manitoba, Canada. We found that summer caribou aggregation size was positively associated with ambient temperature, with aggregations increasing in size as temperature increased. The mechanism behind this behaviour should be investigated, as we predict more frequent and large caribou aggregations as summer temperatures continue to warm.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".