MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119212446 · doi:10.14430/arctic769

Factors Influencing Nest Attendance and Time-activity Budgets of Peregrine Falcons in Interior Alaska

2001· article· en· W2119212446 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Angela G. Palmer, Dana L. Nordmeyer, Daniel D. Roby

Bibliographic record

VenueARCTIC · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Air ForceU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceMassachusetts Department of Fish and GameU.S. Geological SurveyOregon State UniversityAlaska Department of Fish and Game
KeywordsNest (protein structural motif)MorningEveningAttendanceEcologyPaternal careIncubationBiologyZoologyDemographyOffspringPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An essential prerequisite to examining the impacts of anthropogenic disturbance on avian nesting activities is understanding the intrinsic and extrinsic factors that influence the birds' allocation of time to breeding behaviors. We examined factors influencing nest attendance and time-activity budgets of peregrine falcons (Falco peregrinus anatum) breeding along the Tanana River in Alaska in 1995, 1996, and 1997. First, as is typical of most bird species with nidicolous young and biparental care, females attended the nest more than males and, as the nesting cycle progressed, female attendance decreased to levels similar to those of males. Second, nest area attendance followed a circadian rhythm; parents attended the nest area less during early morning and late evening, which are prime hunting periods, than during late morning. Finally, although females typically performed most of the incubating, the division of labor between males and females during incubation differed among pairs. Higher attendance in the nest area by females during incubation appeared to be associated with more young fledged among successful pairs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.226 · 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.

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

Citations31
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueARCTICSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207