MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164088009 · doi:10.1650/condor-13-024.1

Marbled Godwit migration characterized with satellite telemetry

2014· article· en· W2164088009 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Bridget E. Olson, Kimberly Sullivan, Adrian H. Farmer

Bibliographic record

VenueOrnithological Applications · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceNature ConservancyMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsGeographyMarbled meatFlywayFisheryBayBird migrationPeninsulaTundraHabitatCalidrisEcologyArcticArchaeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Marbled Godwits (Limosa fedoa) breed in 3 disparate areas: The majority breed in the prairies of midcontinental North America, but there are also 2 small and widely separated tundra-breeding populations, 1 in eastern Canada and 1 on the Alaska Peninsula, USA. The major winter ranges include the Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf coasts of the USA and Mexico. Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge at Great Salt Lake, Utah, USA, is a major stopover site, hosting large godwit populations in the spring and fall. Although the distributions of Marbled Godwit populations and their habitats across the landscape are generally known, the linkages between them are not. We tracked 23 Marbled Godwits equipped with satellite transmitters from sites in Utah, Mexico, Canada, and coastal Georgia during 2006–2010. Our goals were to characterize the migration strategy of Marbled Godwit populations and to determine migratory connectivity of major breeding, staging, and wintering areas. We found that: 1) godwits breeding in the western USA and Canada followed an overland route to winter sites in Mexico after departing their Utah stopover site; 2) godwits tagged in eastern Canada migrated across the continental USA and wintered at sites along the Gulf of California, Mexico; and 3) godwits wintering in coastal Georgia bred in North and South Dakota. We believe this to be the first demonstration of a continental “crisscross” migration pattern in a shorebird. We identified differences in migration elements such as distances traveled, timing of migration, duration, residency, and stopover strategy between the subpopulations, but not between males and females.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.004

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.208 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrnithological ApplicationsSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207