MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042376425 · doi:10.1071/wr14138

Attachment and performance of Argos satellite tracking devices fitted to black cockatoos (Calyptorhynchus spp.)

2015· article· en· W2042376425 on OpenAlex
Christine Groom, K. S. Warren, Anna Le Souëf, Rick Dawson

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWildlife Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsDepartment of Environment and Conservation
FundersDepartment of the Environment, Australian GovernmentMurdoch University
KeywordsWildlifeContext (archaeology)Satellite trackingEcologyBiologyZoologyEngineeringSatellite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context Studying interactions between a wildlife species and its spatial environment can enable a deeper understanding of its ecology. Studies of spatial ecology are generally undertaken by attaching tracking devices to selected individuals and following their movements. Highly mobile species, such as black cockatoos (Calyptorhynchus spp.), that occupy habitats with patchy resources are ideal candidates. The powerful beak and chewing habits of black cockatoos make it difficult to successfully attach tracking devices to them. Aims We developed a safe technique for attaching tracking devices to black cockatoos and assessed the impact of the tracking devices, as well as their performance in relation to battery life, retention time and accuracy of location fixes. Methods We describe a technique for attaching Telonics (Mesa, AZ, USA) Argos Avian Transmitter TAV 2617 tracking devices to the two central tail feathers of black cockatoos. Key results Of 26 tracking devices fitted (24 to Carnaby’s cockatoos, C. latirostris; two to Baudin’s cockatoos, C. baudinii), 20 exhibited longer retention time than the nominal battery life. One tracking device was chewed until it was non-functional before release and two were presumed chewed after release because their tracking devices failed prematurely. There was no evidence that the tracking devices inhibited the flight capability of cockatoos. The performance of the Argos tracking devices exceeded expectations with regard to retention times, battery life and overall accuracy of location fixes. The tracking devices enabled detection of instances of rapid long-distance movements, including one bird that travelled 70 km between night roosts while migrating. Most study birds (68%) remained within 50 km of their release sites while monitored. Conclusion The tracking devices were a suitable choice for black cockatoos and for the purpose of this study. They posed minimal snag risk, were of suitable dimensions for tail attachment and they enabled data to be collected even if birds dispersed long distances. The main limitations that must be considered when assessing their suitability for future research projects are the errors associated with location fixes, limited retention time in relation to moulting of tail feathers and limited battery life. Implications The development of a method for successfully attaching tracking devices to black cockatoos opens the possibility to study aspects of the ecology of black cockatoos and other highly mobile species that was not previously possible.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.268 · 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