Home-range size of northern flickers (<i>Colaptes auratus</i>) in relation to habitat and parental attributes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Energetic requirements during the breeding season and environmental factors such as food abundance and habitat quality may influence spatial use of the landscape by adult birds. We determined home-range and core-area sizes for 52 adult northern flickers (Colaptes auratus) during the brood-rearing period in 1999 and 2000 in British Columbia. We examined the relationship between home-range size and correlates of energetic demands (age, sex, body size, brood size, nest density, laying attempt). We also examined the association between vegetation type at the landscape scale and ground-cover characteristics at the foraging scale with home-range size, core-area size, and maximum distance flown from the nest to forage. Mean home-range size was 25 ha, with a mean core area of 7 ha. Home-range size was positively related to laying attempt and nearest neighbour distance. No significant relationships were found at the landscape level between vegetation type and home-range size or between ground-cover characteristics and core-area size. However, flickers flew farther to forage in home ranges with tall vegetation and bare ground. Home-range size of flickers may be related to both energetic demands on the adults and on the spatial arrangement of quality foraging patches around the nest 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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".