EGG AND CHICK FATES OF COMMON TERNS IN AREAS OF HIGH AND LOW NEST DENSITY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Common Tern (Sterna hirundo) nests were both clumped (high density) and solitary (low density) at Windermere Basin, Lake Ontario in 1992. Our objective was to measure egg fate and chick survival up to 14–16 d of pairs nesting in these two dispersion patterns. We first measured the distance to nearest neighbor for 100 randomly selected clutches, and defined low-density nests as those at a distance greater than 2 SD (m) away from the nearest clutch. Two sites contained nests at high density (HD1 & HD2), while low density nests (LD) were dispersed throughout the study site. We randomly selected 20, three-egg clutches in each of the three groups. Nearest neighbor distances of HD1 (1.08 ± 0.71 m) and HD2 (2.09 ± 1.03 m) clutches were similar and significantly different from nearest neighbor distances of LD clutches (21.9 ± 37.3 m). There were no differences in clutch initiation dates or C-egg volumes among the 60 clutches of the three study groups. LD and HD1 clutches experienced heavy egg and subsequent chick loss, while losses of eggs and chicks at HD2 were negligible. The evidence for type of predator was largely circumstantial, but for eggs that were destroyed and chicks that disappeared, the loss patterns suggested primary predation by Ruddy Turnstones (Arenaria interpres) and Black-crowned Night-Herons (Nycticorax nycticorax), respectively. The locations and timing of egg and chick losses indicates that opportunistic behavior of these avian predators nullifies any predatory avoidance advantages of high-density nesting once the predator(s) identify the food resource.
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 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".