MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028504347 · doi:10.1139/z03-130

Shorebirds, mud snails, and<i>Corophium</i><i>volutator</i>in the upper Bay of Fundy, Canada: predicting bird activity on intertidal mud flats

2003· article· en· W2028504347 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Diana J. Hamilton, Myriam A. Barbeau, Antony W. Diamond

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMount Allison University
KeywordsBayCalidrisIntertidal zoneBiologyAbundance (ecology)EcologyHabitatPredationFisheryLittorinaWaderGastropodaOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The upper Bay of Fundy is a critical staging area for migrating semipalmated sandpipers (Calidris pusilla), which feed extensively on the amphipod Corophium volutator. Recent changes in the distributions of birds around the bay have generated interest in understanding the factors that influence shorebirds' habitat use. To examine some of these factors, we surveyed four mud flats during summer 2000. Abundance of shorebirds and density of C. volutator and mud snails (Ilyanassa obsoleta) were assessed in two focused areas and on two broad-scale transects per mud flat. Shorebird abundance varied widely across sites, and was positively correlated with C. volutator availability, though the relationship had little predictive ability. A strong negative relationship was identified between shorebirds and mud snails counted before birds arrived, especially in the focused areas. This relationship probably stems from a negative effect of mud snails on C. volutator. Snails present in July may reduce recruitment of C. volutator, and therefore reduce the prey base for shorebirds arriving later in the summer. By considering mud snail abundance, we have identified a simple and effective method of predicting shorebird habitat use several weeks before birds arrive. This will enhance our ability to study these birds in future, and will contribute to our understanding of shorebird habitat use and movements and the importance of conserving particular mud flats.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.148

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.195 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations44
Published2003
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207