DAILY MASS CHANGES IN LANDBIRDS DURING MIGRATION STOPOVER ON THE SOUTH SHORE OF LAKE ONTARIO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assigning conservation priorities to areas used by birds during migration requires information on the relative quality of areas and habitats. The rate at which migratory birds replenish energy reserves during stopover may be used as an indicator of stopover-site quality. We estimated the rate of mass gain of 34 landbird species during stopover at a near-shore terrestrial site on the south shore of Lake Ontario in New York during 12 migration seasons from 1999 to 2004. The average rate of mass gain was estimated by relating a measure of condition to time of capture (hour after sunrise) with linear regression. Data from 25,385 captures were analyzed. Significantly positive rates of mass change were detected for 20 of 30 species during spring migration and 19 of 21 species during autumn migration. No significantly negative trends were detected in either season. Daily rates of mass gain across all species averaged 9.84% of average lean body weight during spring migration and 9.77% during autumn migration. Our regression estimates were significantly greater than estimates from traditional analyses that examine mass changes in recaptured birds. Analyses of mass changes in recaptured birds revealed a mean daily change of −0.68% of average lean mass in spring and 0.13% in autumn. Because of sampling biases inherent in recapture analyses, the regression approach is likely more accurate when the assumptions of the method are met. Similar studies in various habitats, landscapes, and regions are required to prioritize conservation efforts targeting migratory stages of the annual cycle. Cambios de Peso Diarios de Aves Terrestres durante las Paradas Migratorias en la Costa sur del Lago Ontario
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".