MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978305686 · doi:10.1002/jwmg.286

Experimental test of nest‐site limitation in mature mixed forests of central British Columbia, Canada

2011· article· en· W1978305686 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kathryn E. H. Aitken, Kathy Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNest (protein structural motif)Nest boxEcologyBiologyMammalPredation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nest‐site availability limits cavity‐using populations in many harvested forests; however, little is known about the extent of nest‐site limitation in mature forests with a full complement of excavator species and intact processes of cavity creation and loss. To examine the role of nest‐site availability in limiting cavity‐using populations in mature mixed conifer forests in central British Columbia, Canada, we conducted an 11‐year before‐after control‐impact experiment in which we increased nest‐site availability via nest box addition. Our 7 sites (3 treatments, 4 controls) had low cavity densities (<2/ha) prior to treatment and cavity occupation rates were also low (<10%/yr), which is a relationship often cited in the literature as evidence of non‐limitation in cavity‐nesting populations. Following nest box addition at our treatment sites, which tripled the availability of cavities, total density of bird and mammal nests more than tripled. Density of mountain chickadee ( Poecile gambeli ) nests increased 9‐fold on treatment sites and returned to pre‐treatment levels following box removal, suggesting that chickadee populations were limited by cavity availability at our study sites. Density of red squirrel ( Tamiasciurus hudsonicus ) and northern flying squirrel ( Glaucomys sabrinus ) nests and roosts also increased significantly at treatment sites following box addition and declined following box removal. We noted little change in chickadee or squirrel nest density at control sites monitored concurrently. Squirrels preferred large‐sized over small‐sized boxes, and significantly enlarged the entrance areas of small boxes by chewing, suggesting that there may have been a shortage of suitable nest and roost sites for them in our study area. We contend that low cavity occupancy rates may not accurately reflect nest‐site availability for cavity nesters in mature forests, and that cavity size may influence the true availability of cavities on the landscape. © 2011 The Wildlife Society.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.643
Threshold uncertainty score0.748

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations53
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wildlife ManagementSame topicAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207