MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nesting success of common eiders Somateria mollissima as influenced by nest-site and female characteristics in the Gulf of the St. Lawrence

2005· article· en· W2097953583 on OpenAlexaff
François Bolduc, Magella Guillemette, Rodger D. Titman

Bibliographic record

VenueWildlife Biology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEiderNest (protein structural motif)Avian clutch sizeNesting (process)EcologyHabitatReproductive successBiologyNest boxAnatidaeReproductionPredationFisheryDemographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the common eider Somateria mollissima as well as in many other bird species, nesting success has been associated with female reproductive characteristics and predator accessibility to the nest site. In this study, we tested the following predictions on nesting common eiders: 1) female and nest-site characteristics are correlated within a colony, where those with the highest ranked reproductive traits nest where the environment provides best protection, 2) females nesting on forested islands generally exhibit better reproductive traits than females nesting on open islets (hereafter habitats) because the former provide the best nest protection, and consequently, 3) colonies located on forested islands have higher nesting success than those on open islets. During the summers of 1995 and 1996, we recorded nesting success at 270 eider nests on two forested islands and four open islets. Simultaneously, we measured several variables describing nest (nest concealment, vegetation height, distance to shore and density of associated nesting gulls) and female (laying date and clutch size) characteristics. Using factor analysis to relate nest-site and female characteristics, we found a correlation between factor scores within four of the six colonies monitored. This correlation indicated that females with largest clutch size and early laying were associated with nest sites of low concealment that were close to shore. However, female score did not differ with habitat. Nesting success did not differ between habitats when controlled for female and nest scores, but was related to female score, and marginally to nest-site score. Because nesting success was principally related to female characteristics rather than to nest-site characteristics, we suggest that eiders rely on nest attendance rather than on nest concealment to protect their nests. Nesting close to shore may shorten incubation recesses and improve hatchling survival when leaving the nest.

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations16
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWildlife BiologySame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207