DISAPPEARANCE OF BREEDING SEMIPALMATED SANDPIPERS FROM CHURCHILL, MANITOBA: MORE THAN A LOCAL PHENOMENON
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As late as the 1940s the Semipalmated Sandpiper (Calidris pusilla) was the most abundant sandpiper breeding at Churchill, Manitoba. By the 1960s it had undergone a sharp decline, and by the mid-1990s the local population consisted of 11 pairs in a single colony. Nesting was last documented in 2001. Declines had also become evident at several other breeding sites along the Hudson Bay coast of Manitoba and Ontario, as well as in the number of migrants detected on the Atlantic coast of Canada and the northern United States. Information on the biology of the Churchill population in 1993–2004 largely agreed with that gathered at La Pérouse Bay, Manitoba, in the 1980s: reproductive success was good and new birds continued to join the colony; however, the number of breeding attempts by individuals was low and decreasing. As there is no evidence that the decline was related to local factors (e.g., altered habitats, climate change), it is probably attributable to mortality in the nonbreeding season, which leaves fewer birds available to return north. Whether causality can be fully resolved is problematic. Monitoring migrants can reveal population trends and studies on the breeding grounds can help frame hypotheses, but both approaches are time-consuming and provide only partial answers. In such cases, restoration of declining species may be best served by fostering habitat conservation throughout a species' range.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".