MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411030837 · doi:10.1002/ece3.71489

Acceleration Data Reveal Behavioural Responses to Hunting Risk in Scandinavian Brown Bears

2025· article· en· W4411030837 on OpenAlexafffund
Jeanne Clermont, Andreas Zedrosser, Ludovick Brown, Frank Rosell, Gunn Elisabeth Sydtveit Rekvik, Jonas Kindberg, Fanie Pelletier

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Evolution · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMiljødirektoratetNaturvårdsverketNorges ForskningsrådAustrian Science Fund
KeywordsPredationHunting seasonDuskNocturnalWildlifePopulationEcologyCamera trapSeasonal breederGeographyBiologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predation may indirectly influence prey's fitness and population dynamics through behavioural adjustments in response to perceived predation risk. These non-consumptive effects of predation can also arise from hunting by humans, but they remain less documented. Advances in biologging allow detailed assessments of the activity budgets of elusive wildlife, increasing the potential to uncover the non-consumptive effects of human activities on animals. We used tri-axial accelerometry to record the daily activity of 24 Scandinavian brown bears (20 females and 4 males) from a heavily hunted population in Sweden, for a total of 29 bear-years (2015-2022). We used a random forest algorithm trained with observations of captive brown bears to classify the accelerometry data into four behaviours, running, walking, feeding and resting, with an overall precision of 95%. We then used these classifications to evaluate changes in bear activity budgets before and during the hunting season. Bears exhibited a bimodal daily activity pattern, being most active at dusk and dawn and resting around midday and midnight. However, during the hunting season, males became more nocturnal compared to before the hunting season, suggesting a proactive behavioural adjustment to reduce encounters with hunters. Females showed the opposite pattern and had a higher probability of being active during the day, potentially to increase nutritional gains before denning. Additionally, daily number of running bouts did not vary between the pre-hunting and hunting seasons in both sexes, but females' proportion of running bouts occurring during legal hunting hours was higher during the hunting season than prior to it, which suggests a reactive behavioural adjustment to encounters with hunters. Detailed assessments of wild animal behaviours, allowed through recording of movement data at high frequencies, have the potential to improve our understanding of the impacts of human activity on wildlife.

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)0.000
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and EvolutionSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207