Bibliographic record
Abstract
Time activity budgets, foraging habitat quality and behavior of Semipalmated Plovers (Charadrius semipalmatus) were examined during three non-breeding seasons in a large estuarine system in southeastern Georgia, USA. Among the foraging sites available to shorebirds at each tidal stage, non-breeding plovers tracked those with the greatest biomass and density of invertebrate prey. Prey biomass differed according to tidal conditions but was strongly predicted by the salinity, organic content and particle sizes of the sediments. Foraging rates (pecks/ min) and densities (birds/ha) of plovers were both predicted by invertebrate density and biomass. Foraging rates correlated significantly with the rate of defecations, indicating that peck rates were related to intake rates. Foraging rates reached an asymptote of 25 pecks per minute, suggesting an upper limit to the rate of capture unconstrained by digestive bottlenecks. While available, nearly all plovers foraged when on mudflat habitats, while about 33% foraged on salt marsh habitats and 12% foraged on beaches. There was no effect of density of foraging birds on their rate of foraging at mudflats, suggesting that birds were not experiencing intra-specific competition at this productive site.
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".