MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146765422 · doi:10.2193/2006-409

Mountain Pine Beetle Presence Affects Nest Patch Choice of Red‐Breasted Nuthatches

2008· article· en· W2146765422 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrea R. Norris, Kathy Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMountain pine beetleNest (protein structural motif)ForagingDendroctonusBiologyEcologyHabitatBark beetleBark (sound)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: The mountain pine beetle ( Dendroctonus ponderosae ) outbreak in western Canada poses significant conservation concern; thus, insights into its effects on wildlife habitat are essential. We used generalized linear mixed models to examine the influence of quaking aspen ( Populus tremuloides ) and mountain pine beetle—infected lodgepole pine ( Pinus contortus ) on nest patch selection of red‐breasted nuthatches ( Sitta canadensis ) in central British Columbia, Canada. Prior to the outbreak, nuthatches selected nest patches with 64% more suitable nest trees (standing dead aspen, ≥12.5 cm dbh) than available (103 trees/ha vs. 63 trees/ha, respectively), but in outbreak years nuthatches chose nest patches with 37% more beetle‐infected pine trees than available (63 trees/ha vs. 46 trees/ha, respectively). Our results suggest that nuthatches select sites that maximize nesting and foraging opportunities and, during food pulses, may trade off higher densities of suitable nest trees for higher densities of foraging trees. (JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT 72(3):733–737; 2008)

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.352
Threshold uncertainty score0.771

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.215 · 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.

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

Citations22
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wildlife ManagementSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207