Can a ‘wintering area effect’ explain population status of Swainson's hawks? A stable isotope approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT It has been suggested that declines in breeding populations of Swainson's hawks (Buteo swainsoni) in California, Oregon, and Nevada may be due to differential mortality of hawks on their wintering grounds. Although massive mortality incidents reported on the wintering grounds partially support this suggestion, there are no data showing differential use of wintering areas by breeding populations of Swainson's hawks. We used stable‐hydrogen isotope analysis of feathers to determine whether large flocks of hawks wintering in Argentina consisted of a mixture of individuals from across the North American breeding range or consisted of individuals from discrete breeding populations. We found that flocks of wintering Swainson's hawks consisted of a mixture of individuals. The lack of connectivity between populations of breeding and wintering hawks suggests that high wintering mortality, either natural or human‐induced, is unlikely to have direct consequences on a single breeding area in North America. The demographic effects of winter mortality should be ‘diluted’ across the entire breeding range of Swainson's hawks.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".