MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Site Occupancy Dynamics of Northern Spotted Owls in the Eastern Cascades, Washington, USA, 1990–2003

2010· article· en· W2101095303 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrew J. Kroll, Tracy L. Fleming, Larry L. Irwin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOccupancyGeographyWildlifeThreatened speciesExtinction (optical mineralogy)EcologyHabitatBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Northern spotted owls ( Strix occidentalis caurina ) have received intense research and management interest since their listing as a threatened species by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service in 1990. Several spotted owl ( Strix occidentalis ) response variables have been examined in various investigations, but recent advances in statistical modeling permit evaluations of temporal and spatial variability in site occupancy, local‐extinction, and colonization probabilities while incorporating imperfect detection probabilities. Following recent work by other researchers on site occupancy dynamics of spotted owls in Oregon, USA, we evaluated temporal variability of detection, occupancy, local‐extinction, and colonization probabilities for spotted owls, as well as potential influences of barred owl ( Strix varia ) presence on these parameters. We used spotted owl survey data collected from 1990 to 2003 on a study area in the eastern Cascades Mountains, Washington, USA, to compare competing occupancy models from Program PRESENCE using Akaike's Information Criterion. Detection probabilities for individual spotted owls ranged from 0.54 to 0.80 if barred owls were not detected during the survey season and from 0.19 to 0.71 if barred owls were detected during the survey season. Pair detection probabilities ranged from 0.27 to 0.67 if barred owls were not detected during an individual survey and from 0.09 to 0.36 if barred owls were detected during an individual survey. During the study, site occupancy probabilities for spotted owl pairs declined by approximately 50%. For all spotted owls, both singles and pairs, site occupancy probabilities declined moderately during the study. Barred owl presence was negatively associated with spotted owl detection probabilities, and it had a positive association with local‐extinction probabilities for all spotted owls, both singles and pairs. Given that our study area has supported higher densities of barred owls for longer periods than other study areas, our results may provide insight into how barred owls have influenced spotted owl site occupancy dynamics in adjacent British Columbia, Canada, or will influence spotted owl site occupancy dynamics in Oregon and California, USA, in the future.

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)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.753

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations23
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wildlife ManagementSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207