MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

VARIABILITY IN VEGETATION EFFECTS ON DENSITY AND NESTING SUCCESS OF GRASSLAND BIRDS

2005· article· en· W2175478572 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Maiken Winter, Douglas H. Johnson, Jill A. Shaffer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyMcMaster UniversityMinnesota Department of Natural Resources
KeywordsSparrowGrasslandVegetation (pathology)EcologyNest (protein structural motif)GeographyNesting (process)Biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The structure of vegetation in grassland systems, unlike that in forest systems, varies dramatically among years on the same sites, and among regions with similar vegetation. The role of this variation in vegetation structure on bird density and nesting success of grassland birds is poorly understood, primarily because few studies have included sufficiently large temporal and spatial scales to capture the variation in vegetation structure, bird density, or nesting success. To date, no large-scale study on grassland birds has been conducted to investigate whether grassland bird density and nesting success respond similarly to changes in vegetation structure. However, reliable management recommendations require investigations into the distribution and nesting success of grassland birds over larger temporal and spatial scales. In addition, studies need to examine whether bird density and nesting success respond similarly to changing environmental conditions. We investigated the effect of vegetation structure on the density and nesting success of 3 grassland-nesting birds: clay-colored sparrow (Spizella pallida), Savannah sparrow (Passerculus sand-wichensis), and bobolink (Dolichonyx oryzivorus) in 3 regions of the northern tallgrass prairie in 1998–2001. Few vegetation features influenced the densities of our study species, and each species responded differently to those vegetation variables. We could identify only 1 variable that clearly influenced nesting success of 1 species: clay-colored sparrow nesting success increased with increasing percentage of nest cover from the surrounding vegetation. Because responses of avian density and nesting success to vegetation measures varied among regions, years, and species, land managers at all times need to provide grasslands with different types of vegetation structure. Management guidelines developed from small-scale, short-term studies may lead to misrepresentations of the needs of grassland-nesting birds.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations163
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wildlife ManagementSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207