Range‐Wide Piping Plover Survival: Correlated Patterns and Temporal Declines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Geographically isolated breeding populations of migratory shorebirds may be demographically connected through shared nonbreeding habitats. We used long‐term (1998–2008) mark‐recapture data on piping plovers ( Charadrius melodus ) collected from 7 separate studies located throughout North America to conduct a range‐wide analysis of after hatch year apparent survival (φ AHY ). Our objectives were to compare concurrent survival estimates from disparate breeding sites and determine whether estimates followed similar trends or were correlated among breeding populations with shared wintering grounds. Average survival estimates were higher for Great Plains populations (range = 0.69–0.81) than for Great Lakes and Atlantic Coast populations (range = 0.56–0.71). Linear trend models indicated that apparent survival declined in 4 out of 7 populations, was unchanged in 3, and was generally highest among Great Plains populations. Based on a post hoc analysis, we found evidence of correlated year‐to‐year fluctuations in annual survival among populations wintering primarily along the southeastern United States Atlantic Coast and Gulf Coast. Our results indicate shared overwintering or stopover sites may influence annual variation in survival among geographically disparate breeding populations. Declines in piping plover survival are a cause for concern, and our results highlight the need for conservation efforts to include habitat used during the migratory and wintering periods.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".