MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099010145 · doi:10.1017/s0959270911000244

Distribution and abundance of Chubut Steamerducks: an endemic species to Central Patagonia, Argentina

2011· article· en· W2099010145 on OpenAlexaff
María Laura Agüero, Pablo García Borboroglu, Daniel Esler

Bibliographic record

VenueBird Conservation International · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y TécnicasNeotropical Bird ClubRufford FoundationWildlife Conservation Society
KeywordsGeographyRange (aeronautics)Abundance (ecology)PopulationHabitatEcologyShoreNational parkFisheryBiologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary We documented the breeding distribution and estimated abundance of Chubut SteamerducksTachyres leucocephalus,a flightless waterbird endemic to a relatively small section of coastline in Patagonia, Argentina. The distribution of Chubut Steamerducks is restricted to approximately 700 km of coast. We counted 1,703 adult steamerducks at a subset of shorelines within their range and estimated 1,841 adults after correcting for visibility for shore-based surveys. To estimate adult densities in unsurveyed areas, we used two different methods of extrapolation, resulting in estimates of 1,587 and 1,832 adults. Combined with numbers from surveyed shorelines, the total breeding population size is estimated to be between 3,428 and 3,673 adults. In addition, we counted 1,899 juvenile steamerducks, which occur in irregular aggregations. The Interjurisdictional Marine Park in San Jorge Gulf contains about 46% of the entire population, which may provide some protection from disturbance and habitat destruction. However, oil pollution, other anthropogenic activities, and invasive species still pose potential threats to the population.

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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.242
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations7
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBird Conservation InternationalSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207