MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313085456 · doi:10.2307/3802883

Survival of Gadwall and Mallard Ducklings in Southcentral Saskatchewan

2002· article· en· W2313085456 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michel Gendron, Robert G. Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZoologyGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent studies have reported considerable spatiotemporal variation in duckling survival. Using radiotelemetry, we monitored 114 mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) and 73 gadwall (A. strepera) brood-rearing females on St. Denis National Wildlife Area (SDNWA), Saskatchewan, Canada, during 1996 and 1997 and at Allan Hills (AH), Saskatchewan, Canada, during 1997 to (1) determine duckling survival, and (2) evaluate several hypotheses advanced to explain variation in survival. Overall, gadwall duckling survival to 30 days was greater than that of mallard ducklings. Additionally, initial brood size of gadwall was greater than mallard on SDNWA during 1996 and at AH during 1997; no difference was detected on SDNWA during 1997. When effects of initial brood size and duckling survival were combined, gadwalls typically produced more ducklings than mallards during all years and at all sites. Relative to previous studies, high survival rates and little variation in survival between years or study sites (1997), or with hatching date (both species), probably resulted from excellent wetland habitat conditions. Some studies have reported lower survival in broods that traveled farther overland to wetlands, but little support was obtained for this hypothesis. Likewise, no consistent intraspecific patterns existed between duckling survival and initial brood size, or indices of female body size and condition.

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 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 score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations48
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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