The breeding ecology of ruddy turnstones (<i>Arenaria interpres</i>) in the eastern Canadian Arctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2002 and 2003, studies were made of the breeding phenology, nesting success, nesting density, and rates of nest predation of ruddy turnstones ( Arenaria interpres ) at East Bay, Southampton Island, Nunavut, Canada. Previous data from East Bay were used to compare nesting chronology and nest success across years. Bird banding data were used to examine migration routes and rates of return. In all years, ruddy turnstones initiated nests within 7 days of arrival at the study area. The median date of incubation onset was the same in 2002 and 2003, despite different spring snow conditions. Snow remained later in the season in 2003 and the overall range of incubation onset was greater than in 2002. Ruddy turnstones at East Bay nested at high densities and in semi-colonial groups with a significantly aggregated distribution. In both years, nest success was low, predation was high, and lemmings were scarce. These data (and data from earlier East Bay studies) support the ‘alternative prey hypothesis’. Resighting rates of breeding adults between 2002 and 2003 were also low. Individuals banded at East Bay were resighted at Delaware Bay on the Atlantic coast of the United States, the Caribbean Islands, and in southern Brazil. This study increases our knowledge of this understudied species about which there is conservation concern.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".