Influence of landscape pattern on breeding distribution and success in a threatened Alcid, the marbled murrelet: model transferability and management implications
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Summary The marbled murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus is a threatened Alcid nesting in old‐growth coastal forests from central California to Alaska. Logging has greatly reduced the amount and altered the pattern of the species’ nesting habitat. Landscape fragmentation effects on the breeding ecology of the species are poorly understood because of the inaccessibility of nest sites. Using radio‐telemetry, 157 marbled murrelet nests were located in two old‐growth areas in British Columbia, Canada, with different logging histories. Probable breeding success was estimated from nest attendance patterns by radio‐tagged parents. Information‐theoretic and hypothesis‐testing methods were used to model breeding distribution (used vs. random unknown sites) and success (successful vs. failed nests) within c. 50‐km radius extents at a scale of 2·3‐km radius landscapes. Intersite transferability of distribution models was tested. Breeding distribution was positively related with old‐growth patch proximity, edge density (natural and artificial) and contrast, proportion of landscape under old‐growth or core habitat, and interspersion of old‐growth patches; it was negatively related with coastal zone proximity and mean old‐growth patch size. Breeding success was negatively affected by the edge contrast, coast proximity and proportion of young forest, probably reflecting the distribution of nest predators. All distribution models discriminated well between used and random landscapes within the training area. Intersite model transferability was good for 50% of the models. The models less predictive of the training site (area under the curve 0·676–0·738) were more transferable, probably because at the training site, which had considerably less old‐growth nesting habitat (18% of extent) than the testing site (55%), breeding distribution was driven by a different subset of predictors. Synthesis and applications. Geographic information system (GIS) data were helpful in discriminating between landscapes known to be used by nesting marbled murrelets and those with unknown breeding status. Previous indirect inferences about landscape‐level effects on breeding distribution in the birds were shown to correspond with their true nesting distribution. Our results suggest that habitat fragmentation per se need not have a negative effect on the birds beyond that as a result of habitat loss, unless associated with an increased abundance of predators. Our results fine‐tune the existing habitat conservation guidelines by suggesting that protection of old‐growth forest adjacent to clearcuts is important. We provide a means for desktop classification of marbled murrelet landscapes. We advise the application of several different models, depending on the amount of remaining old‐growth forest, to evaluate the consistency of predictions.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».