Survival analysis of a critical resource for cavity‐nesting communities: patterns of tree cavity longevity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tree cavities are a vital multi-annual resource used by cavity-nesting birds and mammals for nesting and shelter. The abundance of this resource will be influenced by the rates at which cavities are created and destroyed. We applied the demographic concepts of survival and longevity to populations of tree holes to investigate rates of loss for cavities in three tree species, as well as how characteristics of nest trees, habitat type, and species of excavator affected the persistence of tree cavities in trembling aspen, Populus tremuloides (95% of cavities were in aspen trees), in interior British Columbia, Canada. By modeling survival of 1635 nesting cavities in aspen over a time span of 16 years, we found that the decay stage of the nest tree was the most important factor determining cavity longevity. Cavities in trees with advanced decay had a relatively short median longevity of 7 years (95% CI 6-9 years), whereas those in living trees had a median longevity of more than 15 years. We found that cavity longevity was greater in continuous forest than in aspen grove habitat. Interestingly, cavities formed by weak excavators survived as long as those created by Northern Flickers (Colaptes auratus), despite occurring in more decayed tree stems. Thus, weak excavators may be selecting for characteristics that make a tree persistent, such as a broken top. Our results indicate that retention of cavities in large, live aspen trees is necessary to conserve persistent cavities, and that cavity longevity will have a large effect on the structure and function of cavity-using vertebrate communities.
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 | 0.001 | 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".