Comparison of atlas data to determine the conservation status of bird species in New South Wales, with an emphasis on woodland-dependent species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An overview of changes to the distribution and numbers of New South Wales birds was considered in relation to the IBRA bioregions, using data from Birds Australia's first and second national bird atlases (Atlas 1, 1977 - 1981 and Atlas 2, 1998 - 2001). Reporting rates, adjusted for survey effort, were compared for 347 bird species. Of these, 184 species (53%) showed no change between the two atlases, 83 (24%) were recorded more frequently during Atlas 2, and 80 (23%) were recorded less frequently during Atlas 2. This represents a greater proportion of declining bird species in NSW compared with the whole of Australia - one previous study found that 15% of 422 species had declined nationally. Of 139 woodland species tested, 33 (24%) were recorded less frequently during Atlas 2, a similar proportion to the broader pattern for all NSW bird species (23%). Woodland birds represented 41% of the declining bird species in NSW, 43% of the increasing species and 38% of species showing no change between the two atlases. Based on IUCN criteria, the current study indicates that 56 bird species may qualify as threatened in NSW. A brief case study is presented for one such species, the Gang-gang Cockatoo, which has subsequently been listed as threatened. Our study also identifies possible drivers of regional patterns by modelling changes in reporting rate for individual woodland bird species against a selection of bioregional features from the National Land and Water Resources Audit, Landscape Health in Australia database. Bioregions with greater rainfall had increased reporting rates and greater woodland bird diversity in Atlas 2 compared with Atlas 1. Reporting rates for individual woodland bird species responded both positively and negatively to the % native vegetation cover and the % area grazed by livestock within bioregions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".