MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1520165631

Advances in the study of irruptive migration

2006· article· en· W1520165631 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ian Newton

Notice bibliographique

RevueArdea · 2006
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiqueAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésEconomic shortagePopulationGeographyBorealFood shortageEcologyBiologyDemography
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This paper discusses the movement patterns of two groups of birds which are generally regarded as irruptive migrants, namely (a) boreal finches and others that depend on fluctuating tree-fruit crops, and (b) owls and others that depend on cyclically fluctuating rodent populations. Both groups specialise on food supplies which, in particular regions, fluctuate more than 100-fold from year to year. However, seed-crops in widely separated regions may fluctuate independently of one another, as may rodent populations, so that poor food supplies in one region may coincide with good supplies in another. If individuals are to have access to rich food supplies every year, they must often move hundreds or thousands of kilometres from one breeding area to another. In years of widespread food shortage (or high numbers relative to food supplies) extending many thousands or millions of square kilometres, large numbers of individuals migrate to lower latitudes, as an ‘irruptive migration’. For these reasons, the distribution of the population, in both summer and winter, varies greatly from year to year. In particular breeding areas, many species of irruptive migrants fluctuate in density according to food supplies at the time. The facts that the response to food change is rapid, and that increases in numbers from one year to the next are often greater than can be explained by high survival and reproduction from the previous year, imply that such year to year density changes are due mainly to movements. Ring recoveries and other data lend support to this view. In irruptive migrants, in contrast to regular migrants, site fidelity is poor, and few individuals return to the same breeding areas in successive years (apart from owls in the increase phase of a rodent cycle). Moreover, ring recoveries and radio-tracking confirm that the same individuals can breed in different years in areas separated by hundreds or thousands of kilometres. Extreme examples are provided by Common Crossbills Loxia curvirostra, in which individual adults were found in localities up to 3200 km apart in different breeding seasons, and Snowy Owls Nyctea scandiaca found in localities up to nearly 2000 km apart. The implication from irruptive migrations, that individuals can winter in widely separated localities in different years, is also supported by ring recoveries, at least in seed-eaters, in which individuals have been found in one winter hundreds or thousands of kilometres from where they were ringed in a previous winter. Most such shifts could be regarded as lying at different points on the same migration axis, but some were apparently on different axes, as the birds were recovered in winter far to the east or west of where they were ringed in a previous winter. Extreme examples include a Bohemian Waxwing Bombycilla garrulus (6000 km, Ukraine to Siberia), a Siskin Carduelis spinus (3000 km, Sweden to Iran), a Pine Siskin Carduelis pinus (3950 km, Quebec to California), and a Common Redpoll Carduelis flammea (8350 km, Belgium to China). Compared to regular (obligate) migrants, irruptive (facultative) migrants show much greater year to year variations in the proportions of individuals that migrate, and greater individual and year to year variations in the timing, directions and distances of movements. The control systems are flexible in irruptive migrants, enabling individuals to respond to feeding conditions at the time. However, regular and irruptive migrants are probably best regarded, not as distinct categories, but as representing opposite extremes of a continuum of migratory behaviour found among birds, from narrow and consistent at one end to broad and flexible at the other. Both systems are adaptive, the one to conditions in which resource levels are predictable in space and time, and the other to conditions in which resource levels are unpredictable. Depending on the predictability and stability of its food supply, the same species may behave as a resident or regular migrant in one part of its range, and as an irruptive migrant in another, as exemplified by particular species of both seed-eaters and rodent-eaters.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,038
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,979

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,260
Écart entre enseignants0,251 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations122
Publié2006
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueArdeaMême sujetAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesTravaux en français237 207