MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103961307 · doi:10.2193/2005-680

Modeling and Mapping Abundance of American Woodcock Across the Midwestern and Northeastern United States

2007· article· en· W2103961307 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Wayne E. Thogmartin, John R. Sauer, Melinda G. Knutson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Forest Service
KeywordsWoodcockGeographyEcologyAbundance (ecology)PopulationRange (aeronautics)Basal areaBreeding bird surveyPhysical geographyForestryDemographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We used an over‐dispersed Poisson regression with fixed and random effects, fitted by Markov chain Monte Carlo methods, to model population spatial patterns of relative abundance of American woodcock ( Scolopax minor ) across its breeding range in the United States. We predicted North American woodcock Singing Ground Survey counts with a log‐linear function of explanatory variables describing habitat, year effects, and observer effects. The model also included a conditional autoregressive term representing potential correlation between adjacent route counts. Categories of explanatory habitat variables in the model included land‐cover composition, climate, terrain heterogeneity, and human influence. Woodcock counts were higher in landscapes with more forest, especially aspen ( Populus tremuloides ) and birch ( Betula spp.) forest, and in locations with a high degree of interspersion among forest, shrubs, and grasslands. Woodcock counts were lower in landscapes with a high degree of human development. The most noteworthy practical application of this spatial modeling approach was the ability to map predicted relative abundance. Based on a map of predicted relative abundance derived from the posterior parameter estimates, we identified major concentrations of woodcock abundance in east‐central Minnesota, USA, the intersection of Vermont, USA, New York, USA, and Ontario, Canada, the upper peninsula of Michigan, USA, and St. Lawrence County, New York. The functional relations we elucidated for the American woodcock provide a basis for the development of management programs and the model and map may serve to focus management and monitoring on areas and habitat features important to American woodcock.

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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations32
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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