Rearing and Release of Two Young American Kestrels (falco Sparverius)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
On 5 July 1973, while banding young American Kestrels on the Buena Vista Marsh in central Wisconsin, we inspected a nest reported to us by a local farmer.It was located in a living white pine (Pinus strobus), part of a small clump of trees in an open field.There were several holes along the trunk; one of the uppermost, about 35 feet up, contained five young American Kestrels.All were females infested with ectoparasites.The nest material, presumably from a previous occupant, was very moist.The cavity was so narrow that the young birds were forced to sit on top of each other.Two of the young were considerably smaller than the others and very weak.We banded, weighed, and measured the three healthy chicks and returned them to the nest but took the two weak chicks home to hand rear.Their age was approximately five days.For the first few days we kept them in a cloth-lined cardboard box and fed them pea-sized pieces of meat, usually mice, moistened in saliva in the palm of our hands.Soon we fed them larger pieces, including fur and bone.On 8 July we found a pellet in the box.After spending a few days in the box, the Kestrels were moved to a homemade bird feeder in the front yard of our home in the country.This afforded them sunlight and allowed them to become accustomed to their surroundings.On 18 and 19 July they flew to nearby spruce trees where they perched most of the day.At that time we offered them food at the feeder more frequently than usual, trying to lure them back.One waited an entire day before returning to the feeder.They begged for food, but were reluctant to fly.It was important that they learn to come to us for food instead of having us take food to them, for they might have flown into the nearby woods and we would never have found them.Because we consistently whistled while offering food to them, they learned to associate food with
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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 ».