MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066922363 · doi:10.1890/03-5339

A CLUTCH AND BROOD SURVIVAL MODEL THAT DISCRIMINATES RANDOM AND CORRELATED MORTALITY

2005· article· en· W2066922363 on OpenAlexafffund
Barry D. Smith, W. Sean Boyd, Matthew R. Evans

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Applications · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityMount Allison UniversityEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersSimon Fraser University
KeywordsBiologyBroodOverdispersionFledgeEcologyPopulationVital ratesAvian clutch sizePredationAbiotic componentDemographyPopulation growthReproduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantitative conservation methodologies such as Population Viability Analysis (PVA) require reliable estimates of life history parameters such as breeding success. The utility of such metrics for egg-laying species is complicated by the fact that the mortality of eggs and juveniles can occur both randomly and independently over time, or catastrophically, as in the sudden loss of a clutch or brood. Not knowing the nature of mortality caused by either or both of abiotic (e.g., weather) and biotic (e.g., predation) events limits our ability to confidently assess a population's demography and sustainability, or rank competing hypotheses. To address this deficiency, we describe a statistical model that estimates egg and juvenile survival rates continuously from laying to fledging based on periodic observations of individual clutches and broods. Adjunct data on environmental or predation threats can be included in the model as covariate series potentially affecting juvenile survival. Our model can statistically characterize mortality between the extremes of random and catastrophic mortality and can determine if unwitnessed mortalities occurred independently or were correlated (i.e., overdispersed, where catastrophe is extreme overdispersion). Overdispersion is estimated as a parameter of the beta-binomial probability distribution of survival outcomes, which differs from its treatment in Program MARK where overdispersion is an a posteriori diagnostic referred to as ĉ. We used data for the sea duck Barrow's Goldeneye to illustrate our model. Specifically, we contribute to the argument that a larger brood confers a fitness advantage to a tending hen by concluding that brood size on hatch day is positively correlated with a juvenile's probability of surviving to fledge.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.937

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.239 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations20
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological ApplicationsSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207