Body mass of prefledging Emperor Geese<i>Chen canagica</i>: large‐scale effects of interspecific densities and food availability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied body mass of prefledging Emperor GeeseChen canagicaat three locations across the Yukon–Kuskokwim Delta, Alaska, during 1990–2004 to investigate whether large‐scale variation in body mass was related to interspecific competition for food. From 1990 to 2004, densities of Cackling GeeseBranta hutchinsii minimamore than doubled and werec. 2–5× greater than densities of Emperor Geese, which were relatively constant over time. Body mass of prefledging Emperor Geese was strongly related (negatively) to interspecific densities of geese (combined density of Cackling and Emperor Geese) and positively related to measures of food availability (grazing lawn extent and net above‐ground primary productivity (NAPP)). Grazing by geese resulted in consumption of ≥ 90% of the NAPP that occurred in grazing lawns during the brood‐rearing period, suggesting that density‐dependent interspecific competition was from exploitation of common food resources. Efforts to increase the population size of Emperor Geese would benefit from considering competitive interactions among goose species and with forage plants.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".