Conservation initiatives for an endangered migratory passerine: field propagation and release
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The term ‘field propagation and release’ refers to the breeding of captive adults in large field enclosures, allowing them to raise their young, and then releasing those young from that location. This technique is currently being implemented in Canada as one of several recovery tools for the endangered eastern loggerhead shrikeLanius ludovicianus migrans. During 2001–2007 a total of 360 shrike fledglings were produced in field propagation enclosures and 301 were released from these enclosures. Annual return rates of birds released since 2004 are 2–6.6%. Seventeen released birds have been re-sighted, including 10 birds that have returned to the breeding grounds the following season to produce young with wild mates. The high annual return rate of release birds and the successful integration of these birds into the wild breeding population represent important milestones for the recovery of this population. The management technique we describe here has the potential to be applicable to other species that require natural habitat for breeding and/or are reliant on a suite of parent-learned behaviours that cannot be accommodated for or adequately replicated within intensive close captive-breeding or hand-rearing conditions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.006 | 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".