MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Predation on Artificial Nests in Upland Habitats Adjacent to Freshwater Marshes

2002· article· en· W2179797284 on OpenAlexaffabout
Benoı̂t Jobin, Jaroslav Picman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Midland Naturalist · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPasserineWaterfowlHabitatPredationNest (protein structural motif)EcologyMarshBiologyWetlandGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predation patterns on artificial waterfowl and passerine nests were studied in upland habitats adjacent to freshwater marshes located in urban, agricultural and natural habitats, near Ottawa, Ontario in 1989 and 1990. Nest predation on waterfowl nests did not change during the breeding season in urban and in agricultural habitats but it increased significantly in natural habitats. There were no significant differences over time of year in predation on passerine nests in any of the three types of habitats. Nest camouflage was not a factor in preventing nest destruction. Nest predation was higher on passerine nests than on waterfowl nests in urban and natural habitats but was similar in agricultural habitats. Losses of waterfowl nests were similar among habitats in both years. Passerine nests were more frequently destroyed in natural habitats than in urban and agricultural habitats. Small predators such as the blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata) and red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus), more commonly observed in urban and natural habitats compared to agricultural habitats, would most likely explain differences in nest predation among habitats as well as differences between nest types.

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 score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations8
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Midland NaturalistSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207