Habitat Use by Sprague's Pipits (<i>Anthus Spragueii</i>) in Native Pastures and Planted, Non-native Hay Fields
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The addition of planted grasslands (i.e., fields that have been planted with exotic grass and forb species) to the North American landscape has been beneficial for the conservation of many species, but not necessarily for species that show a preference for native grasslands. Under what conditions these planted fields are attractive to native grassland specialists is unclear. Sprague's Pipit (Anthus spragueii) is a native grassland specialist, but it breeds in planted grasslands in some parts of its range. We conducted a comparative study of territory and nest use by Sprague's Pipits in native pastures and planted hay fields from 2006 to 2008. In planted hay fields, territories were characterized by vegetation height of 25 cm and litter depth of <1.5 cm; in native pastures, the birds used territories with 15% bare ground and <1.5 cm litter depth. Nests in both habitats were located in areas with vegetation height of 25–30 cm, whereas random areas had either taller or shorter vegetation. Territories were associated with different vegetation characteristics in both habitats. Sprague's Pipits used the same nest characteristics in both habitat types, which suggests that they found areas within planted grasslands that closely resembled areas that they might use for nesting in native grasslands. Planted fields with a low amount of alfalfa and suitable vegetation height (20–30 cm) should be attractive to breeding Sprague's Pipits.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".