Apparent Survival of Male Harlequin Ducks Molting at the Gannet Islands, Labrador
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Survival rates are an essential parameter for understanding the dynamics and status of wild populations. Apparent survival (the combined probability of surviving and returning to a site) and capture rates were estimated for male Harlequin Ducks (Histrionicus histrionicus) (second-year, N = 30, adult, N = 83) that were captured and/or resighted on the Gannet Islands, Labrador, from 1999-2003. Most birds available for analysis were first captured locally (N = 74), although a significant number were originally banded on wintering grounds in Maine (N = 36), and the remaining three were banded on breeding grounds. Second-year male apparent survival rates were low (0.466 ± 0.118; 95% PLI: 0.256 - 0.689), and different from adult rates (0.744 ± 0.045; 0.647 - 0.822), likely due to increased dispersal of young birds. There was little evidence for annual variation in survival rates, but samples sizes were low. Apparent survival rates of male Harlequin Ducks were lower than found in most studies, suggesting that some males emigrate from the Gannet Islands molting site, but do confirm that there is some fidelity to molting sites, similar to observations of the Pacific population.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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 it