MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2474273727 · doi:10.1139/er-2016-0007

Do hyperabundant Arctic-nesting geese pose a problem for sympatric species?

2016· article· en· W2474273727 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Scott A. Flemming, Anna M. Calvert, Erica Nol, Paul A. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaAV&R (Canada)Trent University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaArctic Goose Joint Venture
KeywordsSympatric speciationBiologyPredationEcologyNest (protein structural motif)Generalist and specialist speciesHabitatGooseAbundance (ecology)ForagingPopulationWildlife

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arctic-breeding geese are at record high population levels and are causing significant changes to some of their breeding and staging habitats. These changes could influence sympatric wildlife, but the nature and strength of these effects are unknown. Here, we review the interactions between geese and sympatric species and propose future research that could help to fill important knowledge gaps. We suggest that geese may be indirectly affecting other species through changes to nesting habitat, prey availability, and predator–prey interactions. Many ground-nesting Arctic birds prefer vegetated wet tundra habitats that offer concealed nest sites; areas also heavily used by breeding and staging geese. Where goose foraging exceeds the capacity of the plants to regenerate, habitats have shorter graminoids and more exposed substrate, potentially reducing the availability of concealed nest sites for other birds. Studies have documented local reductions in the abundance of these concealed-nesting species, such as shorebirds. Despite the nutrient enrichment contributed by goose feces, habitats heavily altered by geese have also been shown to host a reduced diversity and abundance of some invertebrate groups. In contrast, generalist predators show positive functional and numerical responses to the presence of breeding geese. Therefore, the risk of predation for alternative or incidental prey (e.g., lemmings or small bird nests) is likely elevated within or near breeding colonies. Studies have demonstrated a reduced abundance of small mammals in areas heavily used by geese, but it is unknown whether this is related to shared predators or habitat alteration. Sympatric wildlife could be further affected through higher stress-levels, altered body condition, or other physiological effects, but there is currently no evidence to demonstrate such impacts. Few studies have explored the potential effects of geese at larger spatial scales, but we suggest that hyperabundant geese could result in regional declines in the abundance and diversity of shorebirds and passerines. We recommend coordinated studies across multiple regions to quantify nesting habitat, arthropod communities, and predator–prey interactions in response to nearby goose colonies. To align with current multispecies approaches to conservation, adequate knowledge of the potential effects of hyperabundant goose populations on other wildlife should be a priority.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.518
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0070.007

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.224 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations33
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ReviewsSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207