MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039348913 · doi:10.1676/02-123

SURVIVAL AND REPRODUCTION OF WILD TURKEY HENS IN CENTRAL ONTARIO

2003· article· en· W2039348913 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Linh P. Nguyen, Josef Hamr, G. H. Parker

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Wilson Bulletin · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsTrent UniversityLaurentian University
FundersOntario Federation of Anglers and Hunters
KeywordsNest (protein structural motif)PredationJuvenileBiologyHatchingReproductionMeleagris gallopavoAvian clutch sizePopulationReproductive successEcologyZoologySeasonal breederRange (aeronautics)FisheryDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent success of Eastern Wild Turkey (Meleagris gallopavo silvestris) reintroductions across southern Ontario has prompted wildlife managers to investigate the potential of extending the northern limit of this subspecies' range. We monitored the survival and reproduction of introduced Wild Turkeys on the Precambrian Shield in central Ontario during 1999–2001. Mean annual survival of 39 radio-tagged hens was 0.288 ± 0.057 SE. Summer and winter survival rates differed between the first and second years of the study. Spring and fall survival rates did not differ significantly between years. Reproductive parameters that characterized the population included a nesting rate of 0.588, mean clutch size of 10.0 eggs/nest, nest success of 0.500, hatching rate of 0.81, hen natality rate of 1.18 females hatched/female, poult survival of 0.54, and fall recruitment of 0.63 juvenile females/breeding hen. Success of the pilot Wild Turkey introduction in central Ontario was compromised by high predation, low numbers of introduced birds, and a prolonged period of deep snow during 2000–2001.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.201
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations29
Published2003
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Wilson BulletinSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207