MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048532919 · doi:10.1898/10-04.1

Birds and Mammals that Depend on the Salish Sea: A Compilation

2011· article· en· W2048532919 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joseph K. Gaydos, Scott F. Pearson

Bibliographic record

VenueNorthwestern Naturalist · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of California Davis School of MedicineUniversity of California, DavisWashington Department of Fish and Wildlife
KeywordsMarine mammalMarine ecosystemEcosystemHabitatEcologyFaunaMarine conservationMammalIntertidal zoneTerrestrial ecosystemMarine habitatsGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Efforts are underway to restore the Salish Sea, a 16,925 km2 inland sea shared by Washington State, USA, and British Columbia, Canada. A list of the birds and mammals that use this marine ecosystem is lacking. We compiled information from varied sources and identified 172 bird and 37 mammal species that depend on the Salish Sea marine ecosystem. Of these species, 72 bird and 29 mammal species are both highly dependent on intertidal or marine habitat as well as on marine derived food. One hundred bird species and 8 mammal species that use the Salish Sea marine ecosystem have varying degrees of dependence on the marine and terrestrial ecosystems to meet significant life history needs. These interactions between the marine and terrestrial ecosystems indicate the need to integrate marine and terrestrial restoration efforts to achieve long-term conservation of the suite of birds and mammals that use and depend on the marine ecosystem. This comprehensive list of avian and mammal fauna for the Salish Sea serves as a foundation for determining the occurrence of new species and the disappearance of others, enables selection of species as indicators for ecosystem health, and also provides a basis for identifying the mechanisms responsible for marine bird and mammal declines.

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 score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.163 · 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

Citations48
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorthwestern NaturalistSame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207