MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1854488893 · doi:10.1080/09524622.2015.1060531

Relative effects of ambient noise and habitat openness on signal transfer for chickadee vocalizations in rural and urban green-spaces

2015· article· en· W1854488893 on OpenAlexaff
Steffi LaZerte, Ken A. Otter, Hans Slabbekoorn

Bibliographic record

VenueBioacoustics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersInnovative Research Group Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAmbient noise levelTransectNoise (video)Openness to experienceHabitatSIGNAL (programming language)Environmental scienceAkaike information criterionGeographyEcologyComputer scienceStatisticsMathematicsAcousticsPhysicsBiologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urbanization creates communication challenges for many species. Birds in particular rely on vocal communication for reproduction and territory defence, but in noisy or acoustically altered environments signals may be compromised. Both ambient noise and habitat openness affect signal transfer, but it is not clear how these two variables interact in urban green-spaces. Using black-capped and mountain chickadee vocalizations, we conducted transmission experiments to measure acoustic degradation and signal-to-noise ratios among a replicated set of transects spanning a range of both ambient noise levels and habitat openness. We used Akaike information criterion (AIC), an information theoretic approach, for selection and averaging of five alternative linear mixed models. We found ambient noise strongly and negatively correlated with relative signal amplitude and detection of signal features. In contrast, habitat openness appeared to have little effect on signal transfer. We also confirmed that urban green-spaces had significantly greater ambient noise levels than rural sites, which suggests that the dominant impact of anthropogenic noise on signal transfer should be an issue of concern to species conservation within these urban green-spaces.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioacousticsSame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207