Habitat preferences of an endangered species in developing landscapes: the Bush Stone-curlew on the central coast of New South Wales, Australia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The bush stone-curlew Burhinus grallarius is listed as ‘Near threatened’ on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. In NSW, bush stone-curlews are listed as ‘Endangered’ under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. The present study focused on bush stone-curlew populations throughout the central coast of NSW and the aim of this study was to develop an inductive spatial model in Geographical Information System (GIS) of suitable bush stone-curlew habitat based on historical sightings and empirical data. To develop the models, micro-habitat data from 30 sites where bush stone-curlews have been recorded were combined with broad historical habitat maps between Gosford and Port Stephens. The habitat data and developed spatial models indicated that bush stonecurlew sightings are associated with trees dominated by Casuarina glauca and Syncarpia glomulifera. In terms of broad habitat classifications, bush stone-curlews are more likely to be sighted in wet sclerophyll forests (towards Gosford) and dry sclerophyll forests and saline wetlands (Port Stephens). The spatial model developed for this endangered bird will help direct conservation efforts to maintain and promote habitat in areas where urban development is rapidly increasing.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".