MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046025255 · doi:10.3356/jrr-09-13.1

Recovery and Trends of Peregrine Falcons Breeding in the Yukon-Tanana Uplands, East-Central Alaska, 1995–2003

2011· article· en· W2046025255 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert J. Ritchie, John E. Shook

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Raptor Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Park ServiceU.S. Air ForceU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
KeywordsOccupancyNest (protein structural motif)GeographyCliffPeregrinusPopulationEcologyFalconPopulation declinePhysical geographyHabitatArchaeologyBiologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We conducted intensive helicopter-supported surveys to assess the distribution, occupancy, and reproductive rate of Peregrine Falcons (Falco peregrinus anatum) in the Yukon-Tanana uplands of interior Alaska 1995–2003. We surveyed specific reaches of Birch Creek and the Goodpaster and Salcha rivers in this remote area to monitor this nesting species. Each year, we visited potential cliff-nesting areas and known nesting territories during early incubation (late May) to assess occupancy and nesting activities, and during the late-nestling period (mid-July) to count young, document nesting success, and measure reproductive rate. We identified 55 different nest cliffs occupied by Peregrine Falcons during at least one year of our survey. The number of occupied nesting territories detected each year increased from a low of 12 in 1995 to a high of 38 in 2002. Reproductive rate averaged 1.6 young/occupied territory and 2.4 young/successful territory for the nine-year period. The percentage of successful territories each year ranged from 42% to 81% (mean = 65%). Little is known about Peregrine Falcon numbers and distribution in the Yukon-Tanana uplands prior to the DDT-induced decline, but they are currently the most abundant cliff-nesting raptor in the region. Monitoring these remote areas may provide a valuable tool to alert us to population declines before they occur in larger drainages.

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)0.002
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Raptor ResearchSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207