Environmental contaminants, disturbance and breeding failure at a great blue heron colony on Vancouver Island
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Great Blue Herons (Ardea herodias) breeding near a pulp mill at Crofton B.C. failed to raise young in 1987 and 1988. Elevated levels of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and polychlorinated dibenzo-furans were detected in their eggs. The highest 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) toxic equivalent level observed was 496 ng/kg (wet weight) in 1987 (Elliott et al. 1989). I compared the Crofton colony with a less contaminated colony on Sidney Island in 1988 and 1989. I examined three possible explanations for nesting failure: (i) abnormal nesting behaviour by parents because of contamination, (ii) disturbance by human activities, and (iii) predation by Bald Eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), Northwestern Crows (Corvus caurinus) and Common Ravens (Corvus corax). The Crofton colony was successful in 1989 and 1990. Within the TCDD toxic equivalent range of 34 - 257 ng/kg (1989), I observed no abnormal heron nesting behaviour or reduction in numbers of chicks fledged. In 1988 the herons at Crofton were disturbed repeatedly by human activities. Bald Eagles were observed daily at both Crofton and Sidney Island. The heron colony on Sidney Island failed in 1989 and 1990. The failures on Sidney Island were thought to involve a disturbance by eagles followed by rapid removal of eggs and young chicks at unattended nests by crows and ravens. It is likely that disturbance and predation played a part in the failure at Crofton in 1988, but there remains the possibility that environmental contaminants may have increased the sensitivity of herons to disturbance and predation.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".