MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2084681376 · doi:10.1080/03078698.2003.9674291

Spring arrival of passerine migrants in Iceland

2003· article· en· W2084681376 on OpenAlexaff
Hugh Boyd

Bibliographic record

VenueRinging & Migration · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationMet Office
KeywordsPasserineGeographySpring (device)IcelandicPeriod (music)EcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

First sightings in Iceland throughout the 20th century of four summer migrant passerines were studied for possible changes in arrival dates over time, and to relate arrivals to weather conditions in Iceland and in their probable wintering and staging areas. Arrival dates advanced considerably until the 1930s, as Icelandic seasonal temperatures increased. Temperatures and arrival dates changed much less in later years, when Icelandic temperatures showed no sustained trends. Since 1950, Redwings Turdus iliacus coburni have first been seen in the last week of March, Meadow Pipits Anthus pratensis and White Wagtails Motacilla a alba about 20 April and Wheatears Oenanthe o leucorhoa about 25 April. All four species were usually seen earlier when springs in Iceland were warm and wet, and after warm winters in southern Spain. Limited records of departures in autumn suggest that the mean lengths of stay in 1951–2000 were: Redwing 233 days, Meadow Pipit 164, White Wagtail 162 and Wheatear 144 days. Sightings of Redwings and Meadow Pipits, some of which winter in Britain & Ireland, were earlier after warm winters, and during warm springs, in central England. White Wagtails and Wheatears, wintering in Africa, showed no response to English temperatures. First sightings were most likely when winds over Iceland had easterly or southerly components. In 1951–1970 arrivals of Redwings and Meadow Pipits were earlier after winters in which the North Atlantic Oscillation index had been positive and high, but before and after that period no linkage was apparent. Most of these findings resemble those reported from north Norway, though the populations of at least three of the species are probably different. They are unlike the findings from Britain and western Europe, where dates of arrival have advanced most rapidly in recent years while winter and spring warming has continued.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations12
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRinging & Migration→Same topicAvian ecology and behavior→French-language works237,207→