MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047608983 · doi:10.1139/z01-048

Deterring arctic fox predation: the role of parental nest attendance by lesser snow geese

2001· article· en· W2047608983 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Gustaf Samelius, Ray T. Alisauskas

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNest (protein structural motif)BiologyLagopusPredationAnatidaeEcologyGooseArcticSnowZoologyArctic foxWaterfowlHabitatGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High parental attendance at nests can improve nesting performance in birds by shortening the nesting period and by deterring predators that do not force birds off of nests. We examined how parental nest attendance by lesser snow geese (Chen caerulescens caerulescens) affected (i) foraging behaviours of arctic foxes (Alopex lagopus) and (ii) egg loss by geese exposed to arctic foxes at a large goose colony on Banks Island, N.W.T., Canada. Unattended nests and nests attended by single females suffered much greater egg loss to foxes than nests attended by paired geese. This resulted from foxes attacking unattended nests and single females far more frequently than expected by chance and from geese associated with such nests offering little or no resistance to foxes. Paired geese, in contrast, were avoided by foxes and also showed greater resistance to foxes than single females and unattended nests. Nest attendance by male geese can therefore be important in reducing egg loss to arctic foxes, but it may play an even greater role in reducing egg loss to arctic foxes in small colonies or during colony formation, when the ratio of predators to nests is generally high.

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 score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations57
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207