Effects of elevation and forest cover on winter birds in mature forest ecosystems of southern British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Winter diversity, distribution, and density of nonmigratory birds were examined in six mature forest ecosystems from two study areas in southern British Columbia. Forest age ranged from 91 to 150 years and the ecosystems ranged from 500 to 2100 m above sea level. Sampled forest stands had no previous history of logging and were a minimum 30 ha in size. The main objectives of this study were to measure nonmigratory birds in relation to elevation and to percentage of stand-level lodgepole pine composition. Twenty-one nonmigratory bird species totaling 2747 observations were detected at 775 point-count stations in 107 stands using 10-min unlimited-distance point counts. Pine siskins (Carduelis pinus (Wilson, 1810)), red-breasted nuthatches (Sitta canadensis L., 1766), and red crossbills (Loxia curvirostra L., 1758) were the three most commonly detected species. Mature forests at low elevation had between 1.7 and 3.5 times more species and between 2.0 and 4.7 times more birds than forests at high elevation. In addition, species richness and bird density declined with increasing stand-level composition of lodgepole pine. We suggest that low-elevation ecosystems be given high priority in coarse-filter management of winter bird habitat.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".