MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7106042225 · doi:10.7939/83388

The nutritional and foraging ecology of a cyclical herbivore (Lepus americanus) in winter

2025· dissertation· en· W7106042225 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2025
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForagingHerbivoreSnowshoe harePopulationTwigSnowRange (aeronautics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Environmental conditions can affect both an animal’s energy and nutrient (e.g., protein and minerals) requirements and its ability to fulfill them via foraging, ultimately affecting fitness. In winter, browsing (i.e., twig-eating) herbivores experience the lowest food qualities (i.e., nutritional compositions) and quantities and cold temperatures. Snowshoe hares (Lepus americanus), which range across the Canadian boreal forest and exhibit 10-year population cycles, lose weight over winter, implying they may be bottom-up (i.e., food-related) limited. However, whether winter conditions and population densities contribute to nutritional strain in snowshoe hares remains lesser understood. In this thesis, I investigate how protein-energy ratios within foods affect feeding rates (g/day) and weight change (%) of temporarily captive hares, how snow depth (cm) affects twig availability (g/m2), and how food supplementation interacts with environmental conditions, including twig availability and population density (hare/ha), to affect the foraging effort (hr/day), protein intake (%), and space use (ha) of free-ranging hares. I found that hares fed to meet a minimum digestible energy intake, after which protein intake also influences weight change. By considering energy and protein intake simultaneously, my finding unifies conflicting results from older studies. Using trail cameras, I found that twig availability in winter increased as snow accumulated up to 30 cm and then declined dramatically. I also found that only 20% of available twigs hare enough protein to maintain hare weight. With data from free ranging food supplemented and control hares over six winters (2015 – 2021), I found that hares foraged more as twig availability and ambient temperatures, whether they were supplemented with food or not. This result implies that hares forage less when foraging yields less return or greater heat loss. This same study also showed that hares consumed more protein when twigs were more available and when hare densities were lower, indicating that hares could be more protein limited at low food density, either by way of area or per capita. Lastly, I found that hare home ranges shrank as hare densities increased, and that food supplemented hares were more conservative with spaces use at high densities than controls. I suggest that reduced space use at high densities is a strategy to minimize competition and maintain resource familiarity. This thesis provides evidence that high population densities, deep snow, and low temperatures in winter can exaggerate bottom-up limitation in snowshoe hares.

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)0.000
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 score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.170 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Alberta LibrarySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207