MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6981702951

Evaluating Viability of Woodland Caribou in Banff and Jasper National Parks

2010· other· en· W6981702951 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArchivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) · 2010
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Planning and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWoodland caribouNational parkPopulation viability analysisEndangered speciesPopulationWoodlandThreatened species
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recovery of endangered species may require a combination of protection and conservation action. In Banff National Park, the southernmost population of woodland caribou in Alberta was extirpated by an avalanche in April 2009. Concurrently, two of three populations in neighboring Jasper National Park have declined to alarming numbers (≤10). These trends reflect an uncertain future for these populations of woodland caribou despite protection within Canada’s Rocky Mountain national parks. We used population viability analysis to assess the potential for caribou persistence in Banff and
\nJasper National Parks with and without translocation‐based management. We constructed a female‐based projection matrix to model caribou life history and population growth among the Banff, Brazeau, Maligne, and Tonquin populations. Input vital rates included population‐specific estimates of mean adult female survival and calf/cow ratio‐based estimates of mean fecundity, with process variance isolated for each. Our results suggested the Tonquin caribou population within Jasper is likely to remain viable without management action. However, almost certain extirpation is predicted for the Brazeau and Maligne populations, with median times to extinction of 16 years and low likelihoods of persistence
\neven after translocation efforts. Simulations reintroducing 45 female caribou into Banff resulted in a 66–99% chance of ≥8 females remaining after 20 years, making Banff a candidate for reintroduction. However, before translocations are adopted as a recovery tool, we encourage validation of our assumptions that the original causes of extirpation have been addressed and consideration of the challenges of conducting reintroductions to the edge of species’ climatic niches.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.616
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.281
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna)Same topicUrban Planning and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207