Identifying management actions to increase foraging opportunities for shorebirds at semi‐intensive shrimp farms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary The expansion of aquaculture has resulted in widespread habitat conversion throughout the world. Identifying beneficial management measures may dramatically reduce negative impacts of aquaculture for migratory birds. We studied how densities of foraging shorebirds varied at ponds within a semi‐intensive shrimp aquaculture farm on the north‐western coast of Mexico, as related to timing of harvest and tidal cycles. Further, we estimated the total daily available area for each shorebird species throughout two entire harvesting seasons at the shrimp farm. High densities (average ca. 50 individuals per ha) of foraging shorebirds were found during the first days following pond harvest. The most abundant species were Willet Tringa semipalmata and Black‐necked Stilt Himantopus mexicanus , followed by Marbled Godwit Limosa fedoa and American Avocet Recurvirostra americana . Other regular, but less abundant, species were whimbrel Numenius phaeopus and dowitchers Limnodromus spp. Densities of shorebirds sharply declined daily following harvest. In addition, the time‐window availability of harvested ponds was related to each species' foraging behaviour: <2 days for godwits and dowitchers, 4 days for stilts, 5 days for willets and more than a week for avocets and whimbrels. However, birds continued to use harvested ponds that received a low, but continuous water influx. Our results demonstrate that a tropical shrimp farm represents a patchy environment that provides 4·3–12·7% (depending on species) of its total area as foraging opportunities for shorebirds. Synthesis and applications . Sequential harvesting of shrimp aquaculture farm ponds and increasing moisture of the substrate by providing some water supply to harvested ponds, at least throughout the harvesting period, could integrate shorebird conservation into shrimp‐farm production. These low‐cost and easy management procedures would not increase costs or affect shrimp production – thus representing a win‐win opportunity – and would have potential applications for shorebird conservation throughout the world.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".