MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2339299996 · doi:10.1186/s40462-016-0077-6

Effects of geolocators on hatching success, return rates, breeding movements, and change in body mass in 16 species of Arctic-breeding shorebirds

2016· article· en· W2339299996 on OpenAlexafffund
Emily L. Weiser, Richard B. Lanctot, Stephen C. Brown, José A. Alves, Phil F. Battley, Rebecca Bentzen, Joël Bêty, Mary Anne Bishop, Megan L. Boldenow, Loı̈c Bollache, Bruce Casler, Maureen Christie, Jonathan T. Coleman, Jesse R. Conklin, Willow B. English, H. River Gates, Olivier Gilg, Marie‐Andrée Giroux, Ken Gosbell, Chris J. Hassell, Jim Helmericks, Andrew C. Johnson, Borgný Katrínardóttir, Kari Koivula, Eunbi Kwon, Jean‐François Lamarre, Johannes Lang, David B. Lank, Nicolas Lecomte, Joe Liebezeit, Vanessa Loverti, Laura McKinnon, Clive Minton, David Mizrahi, Erica Nol, Veli‐Matti Pakanen, Johanna Perz, Ron Porter, Jennie Rausch, Jeroen Reneerkens, Nelli Rönkä, Sarah T. Saalfeld, Nathan R. Senner, Benoît Sittler, Paul A. Smith, Kristine M. Sowl, Audrey R. Taylor, David H. Ward, Stephen M. Yezerinac, Brett K. Sandercock

Bibliographic record

VenueMovement Ecology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversité de MonctonTrent UniversitySimon Fraser UniversitySurrey Memorial HospitalYork UniversityUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
FundersMarsden FundNatural Resources CanadaEnvironment CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Bureau of Land ManagementNational Science FoundationNational Park ServiceU.S. Geological SurveyUniversity of Colorado DenverArctic Goose Joint VentureInstitut Polaire Français Paul Emile VictorMassey UniversityFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesUniversité de MonctonKresge FoundationUniversity of Alaska FairbanksOil Spill Recovery InstituteUniversité du Québec à RimouskiPort of BrisbaneChurchill Northern Studies CentreAlaska Department of Fish and GameLiz Claiborne Art Ortenberg FoundationU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceKansas State UniversityNational Fish and Wildlife FoundationCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsSubspeciesAnimal ecologyBiologyCharadriiformesCalidrisMegalobramaEcologyNest (protein structural motif)ZoologyFisheryHabitatFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Geolocators are useful for tracking movements of long-distance migrants, but potential negative effects on birds have not been well studied. We tested for effects of geolocators (0.8-2.0 g total, representing 0.1-3.9 % of mean body mass) on 16 species of migratory shorebirds, including five species with 2-4 subspecies each for a total of 23 study taxa. Study species spanned a range of body sizes (26-1091 g) and eight genera, and were tagged at 23 breeding and eight nonbreeding sites. We compared breeding performance and return rates of birds with geolocators to control groups while controlling for potential confounding variables. RESULTS: We detected negative effects of tags for three small-bodied species. Geolocators reduced annual return rates for two of 23 taxa: by 63 % for semipalmated sandpipers and by 43 % for the arcticola subspecies of dunlin. High resighting effort for geolocator birds could have masked additional negative effects. Geolocators were more likely to negatively affect return rates if the total mass of geolocators and color markers was 2.5-5.8 % of body mass than if tags were 0.3-2.3 % of body mass. Carrying a geolocator reduced nest success by 42 % for semipalmated sandpipers and tripled the probability of partial clutch failure in semipalmated and western sandpipers. Geolocators mounted perpendicular to the leg on a flag had stronger negative effects on nest success than geolocators mounted parallel to the leg on a band. However, parallel-band geolocators were more likely to reduce return rates and cause injuries to the leg. No effects of geolocators were found on breeding movements or changes in body mass. Among-site variation in geolocator effect size was high, suggesting that local factors were important. CONCLUSIONS: Negative effects of geolocators occurred only for three of the smallest species in our dataset, but were substantial when present. Future studies could mitigate impacts of tags by reducing protruding parts and minimizing use of additional markers. Investigators could maximize recovery of tags by strategically deploying geolocators on males, previously marked individuals, and successful breeders, though targeting subsets of a population could bias the resulting migratory movement data in some species.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.235
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations79
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMovement EcologySame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207