MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162895510 · doi:10.2981/07-087

Factors Influencing the Survival of Neonate Sharp‐Tailed Grouse <i>Tympanuchus phasianellus</i>

2009· article· en· W2162895510 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Alicia D. Goddard, Russell D. Dawson

Bibliographic record

VenueWildlife Biology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGoddard Space Flight CenterMinistry of EnvironmentUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsHatchingBroodOffspringNest (protein structural motif)BiologyPopulationFledgeEcologyGrouseHabitatDemographyReproductive successZoologyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Offspring survival after leaving the nest is a critical element of population viability and in the management of game species. We estimated brood survival to 35 days and examined the factors thought to influence individual chick survival during the first two weeks post‐hatching in a population of sharp‐tailed grouse Tympanuchus phasianellus near Fort St. John, British Columbia, Canada, during 2004–2005. Using program MARK and an informationtheoretic approach, we assessed the importance of female attributes, date of hatching, distance moved from the nest and weather conditions experienced prior to hatching and during brood‐rearing for survival of offspring. During 2004–2005, 67% of broods had at least one chick that survived to 35 days of age, but within these broods only 34% of the chicks survived. Later hatching dates were positively related to survival during the 0–14 day age interval, whereas the distance moved from the nest by a brood and inclement weather conditions during the first seven days post‐hatching significantly reduced the survival rate of chicks to 14 days of age. Further, inclement weather prior to hatching was positively related to the survival of offspring to 14 days, perhaps because wet weather created favourable foraging environments and habitat characteristics during brood rearing. Cohesive management of nesting and brood‐rearing habitats is required to reduce offspring mortality associated with increased travel between suitable habitats, and may minimize mortality during periods when weather is unfavourable.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations29
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWildlife BiologySame topicRangeland and Wildlife ManagementFrench-language works237,207