MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168591462 · doi:10.7589/2015-02-050

Shot Ingestion by Wintering Female Northern Pintails (<i>Anas acuta</i>) in the Texas Coastal Plain, 2012–14

2015· article· en· W2168591462 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nathaniel R. Huck, Bart M. Ballard, Alan M. Fedynich, Kevin J. Kraai, Mauro E. Castro

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Diseases · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnasWaterfowlShot (pellet)GizzardIngestionFisheryAnatidaeBiologyHabitatEcologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historically, lead poisoning through lead shot ingestion was one of the largest health issues affecting waterfowl in North America. Lead shot was banned for use in waterfowl hunting in the US in 1991 and was banned in Canada in 1997. However, biologists need to understand how, and if, lead shot remaining in the environment will continue to impact waterfowl. Our goal was to estimate lead and nontoxic shot consumption by female Northern Pintails (Anas acuta) wintering along the Texas coast. We found shot or metal fragments (or both) in the gizzards of 39 (17%) of 227 female Northern Pintails collected along the Texas coast. Of these, lead shot was found in seven gizzards, steel shot was found in 24 gizzards, and other metal and fragments were found in 20 gizzards. Some females consumed multiple shot types. Overall, shot (lead and nontoxic combined) ingestion rates were similar to those found prior to the lead shot ban in Texas (14%) and Louisiana (17%); however, lead shot ingestion rates were considerably lower, suggesting that it is becoming less available over time. All Northern Pintails that had lead shot in their gizzards were collected from coastal habitats. While it seems that lead shot ingestion by Northern Pintails has decreased since the ban was put in place, monitoring lead shot ingestion rates from different regions will provide insight into its availability in different habitats and under various environmental conditions.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wildlife DiseasesSame topicMercury impact and mitigation studiesFrench-language works237,207