Genetic relationships, movement patterns, spatial dynamics and diet of the eastern coyote (Canus latrans var.) in Cape Breton Highlands National Park
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first North American adult human fatality caused directly by coyotes, coupled with seemingly high levels of aggressive coyote encounters with visitors in Cape Breton Highlands National Park, formed the rationale for this study, which has been funded by Parks Canada. The objective was to determine if coyotes within the park differ ecologically and behaviourally from other regions in northeastern North America, which might explain the heightened aggression toward humans. The eastern coyote originated from coyotes in the west, which expanded their range east and hybridized with Canis lycaon, the eastern wolf. The eastern coyote is larger than its western counterpart and has adapted to live in packs, predating large ungulates, including moose (Alces alces), possibly as a result of this hybridization. This study investigated the degree of wolf mitochondrial DNA in eastern coyotes from the Atlantic Provinces, movement patterns, use of high human use areas and diet of coyotes in Cape Breton Highlands National Park. DNA samples collected from Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick and Newfoundland coyote's revealed mitochondrial DNA haplotypes characteristic of both C. latrans and C. lycaon with decreasing haplotype diversity consistent with sequential founder events moving from west to east and on islands. Coyotes from Nova Scotia with Eastern Wolf mitochondrial DNA are significantly larger than male eastern coyotes from the same region with coyote mitochondrial DNA. Eleven coyotes had GPS collars attached to investigate their movement patterns. Collared coyotes on the plateau of the park tended to move over larger areas than did coyotes at lower elevation. Human use habitats were avoided more in the community of Chéticamp than in the park, especially on the plateau. Daily movements differed among individuals, however coyotes in the community of Chéticamp moved significantly less during daylight hours compared to animals within the park. Fifty-seven coyote tracks were followed in the snow during the winter of 2013. Their movement paths were analysed using fractal analysis. Coyote paths were significantly straighter than correlated random walks. Path tortuosity was very low but increased with spatial scale, with no discrete breaks in tortuosity at any scale. During the winter, coyotes appeared to move along relatively straight paths scavenging on dead moose. A diet study was conducted to determine what food items coyotes consumed by season and location within the park. Coyotes appear to rely on moose throughout the year with a greater dependency during the winter months. The diversity of prey varied between the lowlands and highlands with the lowlands seeing greater diversity of prey items throughout the year. Several coyotes live within close proximity of Chéticamp. Here they likely access human food available in the form of garbage, but there have been no aggressive human-coyote encounters, and individuals show reduced daytime activity. Within the park, especially on the plateau, coyotes roam over larger areas than they do at low elevations in the vicinity of Chéticamp, they are active during the day, and rely heavily on moose for their diet. This sets the stage for aggressive encounters with humans during the high park visitation period of June to October. There is potential for visitors to directly or indirectly feed the coyotes, potentially habituating them and removing the sense of threat previously associated with interactions with humans.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".