MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123368051 · doi:10.1111/jofo.12038

Differentiation of subspecies and sexes of Beringian Dunlins using morphometric measures

2013· article· en· W2123368051 on OpenAlexaff
H. River Gates, Stephen M. Yezerinac, Abby N. Powell, Pavel S. Tomkovich, O. P. Valchuk, Richard B. Lanctot

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Field Ornithology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsMount Allison University
FundersU.S. Bureau of Land ManagementUniversity of Alaska Fairbanks
KeywordsSubspeciesBiologyDiscriminant function analysisZoologyPlumageMorphometricsEcologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Five subspecies of Dunlins (Calidris alpina) that breed in Beringia are potentially sympatric during the non-breeding season. Studying their ecology during this period requires techniques to distinguish individuals by subspecies. Our objectives were to determine (1) if five morphometric measures (body mass, culmen, head, tarsus, and wing chord) differed between sexes and among subspecies (C. a. actites, arcticola, kistchinski, pacifica, and sakhalina), and (2) if these differences were sufficient to allow for correct classification of individuals using equations derived from discriminant function analyses. We conducted analyses using morphometric data from 10 Dunlin populations breeding in northern Russia and Alaska, USA. Univariate tests revealed significant differences between sexes in most morphometric traits of all subspecies, and discriminant function equations predicted the sex of individuals with an accuracy of 83–100% for each subspecies. We provide equations to determine sex and subspecies of individuals in mixed subspecies groups, including the (1) Western Alaska group of arcticola and pacifica (known to stage together in western Alaska) and (2) East Asia group of arcticola, actites, kistchinski, and sakhalina (known to winter together in East Asia). Equations that predict the sex of individuals in mixed groups had classification accuracies between 75% and 87%, yielding reliable classification equations. We also provide equations that predict the subspecies of individuals with an accuracy of 22–96% for different mixed subspecies groups. When the sex of individuals can be predetermined, the accuracy of these equations is increased substantially. Investigators are cautioned to consider limitations due to age and feather wear when using these equations during the non-breeding season. These equations will allow determination of sexual and subspecies segregation in non-breeding areas, allowing implementation of taxonomic-specific conservation actions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations24
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Field OrnithologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207