MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7034824369

What's In That Scat: An Analysis of Canada Lynx Diet and Distribution in the North Cascades Ecosystem

2021· article· en· W7034824369 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueWestern CEDAR (Western Washington University) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAging, Health, and Disability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredationSnowshoe hareCarnivoreHabitatThreatened speciesEndangered speciesWildlifeTrophic cascadeWildlife conservation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research provides critical information on the diet and distribution of the elusive North Cascades lynx population. Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) are considered threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act and are the focus of protection efforts by the state of Washington as a result of climate change, heightened competition, and human interference. I analyzed the diet and distribution of both lynx and coyote (Canis latrans) in the North Cascades to determine whether there was an overlap of prey and habitat that could constrain lynx restoration. During the summer of 2020, the hiking trails in the North Cascades National Park in Washington state were surveyed by the Cascades Carnivore Project (CCP) to collect the scats of rare carnivores. 428 scats were sent to the Quantitative Wildlife Ecology and Conservation Laboratory at OSU to be DNA analyzed for predator and prey species. Of these, 276 were Canada lynx; 97 were coyote, a potential prey and habitat competitor for lynx. I constructed the diet of lynx and coyote and compared the proportional representation of prey species using the chi squared test of independence. To analyze lynx distribution, I created visual representation of scat collection elevations and cover-types and compared the elevations of lynx and coyote scats using the variance test and 2-sample T-test. The data suggest that the diet of lynx in Washington is specialized, consisting of 78% snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus), similar to diets described for lynx populations in other regions. In contrast, the diets of the coyotes were more general, but the two predators possess a 14-species overlap in diet. Lynx also specialize by using a smaller range of elevations (4000-8000 ft) than the range of the coyote which overlapped and extended wider and more variable elevations (2000-9000 ft) that included areas with less tree cover. Coyote overlap of lynx diet and habitat, compounded by high coyote abundance, suggest coyotes may be a limiting factor in lynx restoration.

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 score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWestern CEDAR (Western Washington University)Same topicAging, Health, and DisabilityFrench-language works237,207