Foraging Behavior of Non-Breeding Semipalmated Plovers
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
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.
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) | 0.004 | 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