MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063051586 · doi:10.1139/z2012-086

Variation in diet of Semipalmated Sandpipers (<i>Calidris pusilla</i>) during stopover in the upper Bay of Fundy, Canada

2012· article· en· W2063051586 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Jenna Quinn, Diana J. Hamilton

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIsotope Analysis in Ecology
Canadian institutionsMount Allison University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNature Conservancy of CanadaNature Conservancy
KeywordsCalidrisBaySandpiperBiologyPredationForagingEstuaryEcologyPolychaeteInvertebrateFisheryZoologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Semipalmated Sandpipers ( Calidris pusilla (L., 1766)) use the upper Bay of Fundy, Canada, as a critical stopover site during their annual fall migration to wintering grounds in South America. While in the area, they feed extensively on mudflat invertebrates. Historically the amphipod Corophium volutator (Pallas, 1766) has been thought to make up the majority of their diet. However, we have recently observed flexibility in foraging behaviour and prey selection by sandpipers. The extent of this flexibility and the current diet composition is unknown. To address these knowledge gaps, we assessed Semipalmated Sandpiper diets using stable isotope analyses of blood plasma and available prey items. Data were collected in two arms of the Bay of Fundy during summer 2009 and 2010. Diets fluctuated between years and sites, but in all cases the diet was much more diverse than previously thought. Polychaetes and biofilm made substantial contributions, and C. volutator was still present in the diet, but at much reduced levels than previously noted. This previously unrecognized inclusion of biofilm in the diet is consistent with recent observations of other calidrid shorebirds. Based on measures of prey availability, there is little evidence of preference for C. volutator.

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)0.001
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 score0.278
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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.185 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicIsotope Analysis in EcologyFrench-language works237,207