MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6988046095

Winter ecology of the North American Badger (Taxidea Taxus Jeffersonii) in the Cariboo Region of British Columbia

2013· article· en· W6988046095 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersThompson Rivers University
KeywordsBurrowBadgerForagingHabitatSnowTorpor
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to examine the winter activities and burrow characteristics of North American badgers (Taxidea taxus jeffersonii). At the northern range-limit of these animals (British Columbia, Canada) winter is long and harsh and habitat patchy and atypical; thus, badgers may respond to winter differently here than elsewhere. Using radio-telemetry and remote-cameras, I documented winter activities of 16 badgers (12♀, 4♂) between 2007 and 2011. Similar to limited and anecdotal data collected elsewhere, badgers during winter reduced home range 3.5 (SD = 0.6) km2 and movements 110.5 (SD = 12.2) m /day and\nintensively used burrows 1.3 (SD = 0.8) burrows per winter. Total winter burrow stay averaged 34 days (SD = 25.0) per winter and this use coincided with the onset of torpor (first week in January). Despite intensive burrow-use, badgers emerged frequently (0.30 ± 0.07 events/camera-night) and displayed foraging behaviour (mean foray length: 46.70 ± 65.44 min). Burrow emergence was not related to temperature or snow depth; rather it was best explained by the amount of time elapsed since the badger entered the burrow in mid-winter (Julian Day). Despite these trends, winter activity was quite variable among individual badgers. I also compared the thermal properties of the burrows used by the badgers to those previously used in summer or for rearing offspring (natal). As expected, all burrow temperatures remained relatively mild and constant throughout the winter; however, winter burrows were significantly cooler during this time than burrows that had been used in the previous summer, albeit a small difference (average 1.9o C). Snow depth at winter burrows did not differ from ‘summer burrows’, yet natal burrows had significantly less snow. Analysis revealed that soil fan size, number of entrances, horizontal cover, presence of infrastructure, and a coarse description of habitat differentiated seasonal burrow types relatively well. I suggest that individual variation (strategies) may be a response to local conditions. Relatively small, patchy, atypical habitat, in combination with extremely large summer home ranges may limit the ability of some animals to gain sufficient fat reserves, thus necessitating additional foraging during winter. Moreover, my research suggests that seasonal burrows differ with respect to measurable habitat features that can be used to identify and protect important burrows (natal and winter burrow). This study has been the first dedicated winter ecology study of free ranging North American badgers and has expanded our knowledge about the winter activities, movements and burrow use of this endangered species. As winter is a critical time in the life history of many mammals, an effective management plan will require an understating of species ecology across all seasons.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.702
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.151
Teacher spread0.147 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network)Same topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207