MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097642190 · doi:10.2193/2007-232

Development and Validation of a Wing Key to Improve Harvest Management of Alcids in the Northwest Atlantic

2008· article· en· W2097642190 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sabina I. Wilhelm, Scott G. Gilliland, Gregory J. Robertson, Pierre C. Ryan, Richard Elliot

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersAdvanced Low Carbon Technology Research and Development Program
KeywordsUria aalgeFeatherWingGeographyBiologyKey (lock)TraitFisheryZoologyEcologySeabirdEngineeringPredationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Murres (thick‐billed [ Uria lomvia ] and common [ U. aalge ]) are legally hunted along the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. Razorbills ( Alca torda ) are also incidentally taken. Only irregular estimates of the total murre harvest are available, so a tool to derive estimates of age‐ and species‐specific harvest is required to effectively monitor the hunt and manage a sustainable harvest. We collected 293 murre and razorbill wings from hunters between 1999–2004, with the goal of identifying wing characteristics that could be used to discriminate age and species. We found that murres and razorbills could be reliably aged (first‐yr vs. older) on the basis of molt limits of greater wing coverts. Using a discriminant function (DF) incorporating length of the first primary and second secondary feather, we classified 95–96% of common murres and 99–100% of thick‐billed murres correctly to species. First‐year thick‐billed and common murres also differed in number of pale secondary coverts (median = 12 and 3, respectively), providing another species‐specific trait. We developed a key to age and assign species based on these results. We assessed applicability and accuracy of the wing‐key with novice observers, who differentiated between murre and razorbill wings using feather‐pattern coloration with high accuracy (95 ± 9%) and were able to differentiate between the 2 murres species using 3 techniques: visual assessment of wing shape (83 ± 14% accuracy), the DF (94 ± 6%), and number of worn secondary coverts for first‐year birds only (83 ± 5%). Experience increased success rates of aging and species classification using wing shape and number of worn secondary coverts but not using the DF. Despite differences in measurement accuracy and repeatability among observers, the DF proved to be robust. Our results will facilitate implementation of a species composition survey for the murre hunt and will improve identification rates of carcasses found during beached bird surveys in the Northwest Atlantic, aiding in monitoring of alcid populations vulnerable to anthropogenic activities.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations14
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wildlife ManagementSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207