MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160274947 · doi:10.1071/wr07017

Nicarbazin bait reduces reproduction by pigeons (Columba livia)

2008· article· en· W2160274947 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael L. Avery, Kandy L. Keacher, Eric A. Tillman

Bibliographic record

VenueWildlife Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBird parasitology and diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsBiologyReproductionWildlifeZoologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Development of effective methods for reducing populations of overabundant nuisance bird species continues to challenge wildlife biologists. Reproductive inhibition, although conceptually pleasing, has been difficult to implement because of the lack of a safe, approved avian contraceptive. Recently, however, nicarbazin received regulatory approval in the United States for use as a bait to decrease hatchability of resident Canada goose (Branta canadensis) and feral pigeon (Columba livia) eggs. In anticipation of the feral pigeon registration, we evaluated efficacy by exposing captive pairs of nesting pigeons to nicarbazin bait for 4 h daily. Egg production was unaffected, but only 9 of 22 eggs hatched, a 59% reduction from pre-treatment when each of the 11 test pairs produced 2 nestlings. In the recovery phase, when treated bait was removed, the 11 pairs produced 18 nestlings. All nestlings produced during the study appeared healthy and normal, and there was no mortality among the adult pairs. Nicarbazin is an effective and safe means of reducing hatchability of feral pigeon eggs that can be used within an integrated management plan to reduce feral pigeon populations.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations29
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWildlife ResearchSame topicBird parasitology and diseasesFrench-language works237,207