Exploring the ecological processes driving geographical patterns of breeding bird richness in British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
British Columbia (BC), Canada, has a diverse landscape that provides breeding habitat for > 300 avian species, and the recent development of the BC Breeding Bird Atlas data set presents key information for exploring the landscape conditions which lead to biological richness. We used the volunteer-collected raw breeding bird evidence data set to analyze the effects of sampling biases on spatial distribution of observed breeding bird species and implemented regression tree analysis (Random Forests) to examine the influence of productivity, ambient energy, and habitat heterogeneity on independently measured breeding bird richness. Results indicated that total breeding species richness is correlated with total survey effort (alpha < 0.001). By stratifying species richness by survey effort, we observed that ambient energy is the top-ranked environmental predictor of breeding bird richness across BC, which, when used in combination with a number of other environmental variables, explains -40% of the variation in richness. Using our modeled relationships, we predicted breeding bird species richness in the areas of BC not presently surveyed between three and six hours. The majority of the productive Boreal Plains, the southern portion of the Taiga Plains region, the lowlands of the Southern and Central Interior, along the Rocky Mountain Trench, and the coastal areas of the Georgia Depression are predicted to have the highest categories of breeding richness (35-57 unique species). Our results support ongoing species diversity gradient research, which identifies ambient energy as an important factor influencing species diversity distributions in the Northern Hemisphere. By linking breeding bird richness to environmental data derived from remotely sensed data and systematically collected climate data, we demonstrate the potential to monitor shifts in ambient energy as a surrogate for vertebrate habitat condition affecting population levels. By analyzing the influence of survey effort on species richness metrics, we also highlight the need to consider adding attributes to the raw breeding bird data set to describe observer experience, such as hours or seasons spent surveying, and provide survey dates to allow greater flexibility for removing survey bias. These additions can increase the utility of atlas data for species richness studies useful for conservation planning.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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 teacher head, 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".