Seasonal Abundance and Species Richness of Birds in Common Reed Habitats in Lake Erie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Common reed ( Phragmites australis ) forms dense stands with deep layers of residual organic matter that negatively affects plant diversity and possibly habitat use by wetland birds. We sought to determine whether seasonal relative abundance and species richness of birds varied among 3 habitat types in Great Lakes coastal wetland complexes recently invaded by common reed. We used fixed‐distance point counts to determine species relative abundances and species richness in edge and interior locales within common reed, cattail ( Typha spp.), and meadow marsh habitats of various sizes during 2 summers (2001 and 2002) and 1 autumn (2001) at Long Point, Lake Erie, Ontario, Canada. We found that total relative abundance and species richness of birds were greater in common reed habitat compared to cattail or meadow marsh habitats. However, we also found that relative abundance of marsh‐nesting birds was greater in meadow marsh habitat than in cattail and common reed during summer. Lastly, we found that, irrespective of habitat type, habitat edges had higher total relative abundance and species richness of birds than did habitat interiors. Our results show that common reed provides suitable habitat for a diversity of landbirds during summer and autumn but only limited habitat for many marsh‐nesting birds during summer. Based on these results, we recommend restoration of meadow marsh habitat through reduction of common reed in Great Lakes wetlands where providing habitat for breeding marsh‐nesting birds is an objective. Managers also might consider reducing the size of nonnative common reed stands to increase edge effect and use by birds, possibly including wetland birds.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".