MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7109984020 · doi:10.5061/dryad.fqz612k4d

Long-term benefits of burns for large mammal habitat undermined by large, severe fires in the American West

2025· dataset· en· W7109984020 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDRYAD · 2025
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHabitatWildlifeRange (aeronautics)UnderstoryHome rangeWildlife refugeWildlife conservationWildlife management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Escalating wildfire frequency and severity are altering wildland habitats worldwide. Yet investigations into fire impacts on wildlife habitat rarely extend to the macroecological scales relevant to species conservation and global change processes. We evaluate the effects of wildfire on habitat quality and selection by large mammals spanning three trophic levels in the Western United States. We analyze 12 years of GPS telemetry data for 2,966 mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), 52 black bears (Ursus americanus), and 74 cougars (Puma concolor) across Utah and Nevada, USA. Over 800 areas burned between 1990-2022 overlapped with the home ranges of 1,892 animals, resulting in almost 23,000 km2 of burned habitat and representing 12.8% of the total home range area for animals in our sample. Habitat suitability models for 664 mule deer, 14 black bears, and 11 cougars indicated that burns improved summer home range quality for mule deer and black bears by 7% and 14%, respectively, highlighting the benefits of fires for nutrient cycling, understory herbaceous growth, and resultant caloric value for animal nutrition. When making fine-scale movement decisions, however, mule deer avoided burned habitats, and all three species generally avoided high-severity burns for up to 30 years post-fire. Thus, the effects of burns on wildlife habitat selection appear to be dependent on spatial scale. Given projected increases in large, severe fires, our results suggest potential reductions in beneficial habitat for wildlife in the long term. However, our results also suggest that prescribed burns, because of their smaller spatial footprints and lower severity relative to wildfires, can benefit wildlife habitat quality through improvements in forage, cover, and other vegetation characteristics. Therefore, managing for low-severity burns and limiting large, severe wildfires, e.g., via prescribed burns or fire control policies, could positively impact the habitat quality of these three common species and, therefore, the economic and ecosystem services they provide.

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.

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDRYADFrench-language works237,207