A global population redistribution in a migrant shorebird detected with continent-wide qualitative breeding survey data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim Over the last two decades, thousands of northward migrating ruffs (Philomachus pugnax) have disappeared from western European staging sites. These migratory ruffs were partly temperate breeding birds, but most individuals head towards the Eurasian Arctic tundras where 95% of the global population breeds. This regional decline may represent either: (1) local loss of breeding birds in western Europe, (2) a global decline, (3) shift(s) in distribution or (4) a combination of these. Location Northern Eurasia. Methods To put the declines in western Europe in context, we analysed Arctic monitoring data from the last two decades (Soloviev & Tomkovich, 2009) to detect changes in regional breeding densities across northern Eurasia. We used a novel approach applying generalized additive modelling (GAM) and generalized estimations equations (GEE). Results We show that the global breeding population of ruffs has made a significant eastwards shift into the Asian part of the breeding range. In the European Arctic, ruffs decreased during the last 18 years. At the same time, in western Siberia, ruffs increased. In eastern Siberia, no significant population changes could be detected. These changes corroborate the finding that during northward migration, growing numbers of ruffs avoided staging areas in the Netherlands and Sweden and started migrating along a more easterly route leading into western Siberia. Main conclusions We detected an unprecedented large-scale population redistribution of ruffs and suggest that this is a response to loss of habitat quality at the traditional staging site in the Netherlands.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".