An aerial survey of nesting Greater White-fronted and Canada Geese in west Greenland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An aerial survey conducted in early June 1999 in west Greenland, between 62o and 72oN latitude, provided breeding pair estimates of 4,314 (+-785 SE) Greater White-fronted Geese (Anser albifrons flavirostris) and 2,631 (+-897 SE) Canada Geese (Branta canadensis). Only one pair of Canada Geese and no White-fronted Geese were observed on transects south of 66o 45' N. Mean densities of White-fronted (0.28 pairs/km2) and Canada Geese (0.25 pairs/km2), were highest in the Kangerlussuaq region (66o 55'-67o 30' N). North of this region, primarily in the area from 67o 30' N to the southern portion of Disko Bay (68o 40' N), densities declined to 0.11 pairs/km2 for White-fronted Geese and 0.03 pairs/km2 for Canada Geese. Few breeding pairs (<6, both species combined) were seen on transects north of the south Disko Bay region. However, increased snow cover and inclement weather prevented a full assessment of this more northerly region. At a local scale, the two species were less likely to occur together than expected by chance suggesting some spatial segregation. The importance of the Kangerlussuaq region to breeding Greater White-fronted Geese and the potential for competition with increasing numbers of recently established Canada Geese is discussed.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".