Diet and Prey Consumption Rates of Nesting Boreal Owls, <em>Aegolius funereus</em>, in Alaska
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dietary composition and prey consumption rates of nesting Boreal Owls, Aegolius funereus, were investigated during 2004–2006 using two methods. Dietary composition was determined during nest visits through examination of 1882 fresh remains containing at least 11 mammalian and 15 avian species. Consumption rates were calculated based on laboratory examination of seven prey detritus bricks following fledging, yielding 1051 items of five different taxa. During 2003–2006, small mammal snap-trapping was conducted in the vicinity of occupied nest boxes, and relative abundance of potential prey items was estimated. A total of 4020 trap-nights yielded 695 small mammal captures of eight species. Consumption rates of nestling owls ranged from 22.0 to 29.7 g of food per day, averaging 24.2 g (SD = 1.8). Comparisons between availability of small mammals (as indicated by snap-trapping) and consumption (as indicated by nest visits and analysis of prey detritus bricks) showed that Boreal Owls are generally preying on mammals proportionate to their occurrence.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".