A study of the distribution of some members of the Nyrocinae wintering on the coastal waters of southern British Columbia.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From September, 1951, until March 1952, field work was carried on to determine the distribution of wintering diving ducks on the coastal waters of southern British Columbia, and an attempt was made to discover and evaluate the factors causing distribution and movement. Diving ducks are influenced by the availability of food and other factors related to this availability. These factors include salmon and herring spawning, grain elevators, sewer outfalls, and changing tides. Local movements result from courtship activity, diel periodicity and disturbing agencies. Mortality factors, including hunting, oiling, predation and lead poisoning did not cause serious Inroads in the wintering diving duck population during the study. Lake, and bay and estuarine habitats were found to be less important wintering areas than habitats along protected and unprotected coastline. All species of diving ducks showed preference for certain habitats and regions in the study area, and were absent or uncommon in others. During the winter, the drakes and hens of most species were distributed non-randomly because of the preponderance of males and their tendency to flock together. In early spring the sexes were distributed non-randomly due to pair formation and predominance of drakes. A differential sex migration was evident in most species of ducks during late fall and early spring. Only a small percentage of juveniles of all species were wintering on the study area, indicating that they possibly winter in other localities.
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 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".