Barred Owl Home Range and Habitat Selection in the Boreal Forest of Central Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We assessed Barred Owl (Strix varia) home range and habitat selection in the boreal forest of central Saskatchewan from 1993 to 1995 using radio telemetry (11 females and 4 males).Breeding, nonbreeding, and annual home-range sizes averaged 149, 1,234, and 971 ha, respectively.Breeding and nonbreeding home ranges overlapped entirely for all but two owls.Relative to habitat composition at random areas, Barred Owl breeding home ranges had greater proportions of old (80+ years) mixedwood forest, and nonbreeding home ranges contained greater proportions of old and mature (50 to 79 years) mixedwood and deciduous forest.Both breeding and nonbreeding home ranges contained low proportions of young (•50 years) forest and treed muskeg.Breeding home ranges contained higher proportions of old mixedwood than nonbreeding home ranges.Habitats used for foraging and roosting differed from the proportions of habitat available within the study area.During the breeding period, Barred Owls strongly selected old mixedwood, with lesser selection for mature mixedwood and deciduous forests.Similarly, in the nonbreeding period, old mixedwood was selected most strongly, with lesser selection for mature mixedwood and mature and old deciduous forests.During the breeding period, owls used habitats in proportion to their availability within home ranges, with the exception of young mixedwood forest, which was selected against.Owls selected old mixedwood within their nonbreeding home ranges and avoided young and coniferous forests, treed muskeg, open areas, and water.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".