MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2565498677 · doi:10.1111/rec.12478

Reclamation and habitat‐disturbance effects on landbird abundance and productivity indices in the oil sands region of northeastern Alberta, Canada

2016· article· en· W2565498677 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kenneth R. Foster, Christine M. Godwin, Peter Pyle, James F. Saracco

Bibliographic record

VenueRestoration Ecology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsCumulative Environmental Management Association
FundersSyncrudeCanadian Natural Resources LimitedCenovus EnergyDevon Energy Corporation
KeywordsHabitatEcologyLand reclamationProductivityAbundance (ecology)Ecological successionGeographyEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The pace and scale of reclamation in Alberta's oil sands region are increasing, and techniques to measure and validate the ecological function of developing habitats are needed. In Alberta, achievement of equivalent land capability to that present before disturbance is a regulatory requirement of reclamation certification. We compared landbird abundance and productivity indices from mist‐netting data collected in 2011–2013 using the Monitoring Avian Productivity and Survivorship ( MAPS ) protocol with local habitat covariates at 35 monitoring stations in natural, reclaimed, and disturbed habitats. Principal component analysis of habitat covariates explained 83% of the variation in 20 habitat‐structure variables. We found significant relationships between habitat covariates and captures of adult birds, young birds, and/or the probability of capturing a young bird (productivity) for 12 landbird species; in some cases, capture responses contrasted with productivity responses to habitat variables. Responses to reclamation age were as expected, given habitat preferences of our target species. Positive responses to reclamation age from obligate forest‐dwelling species take more years to become evident than those for species preferring successional‐stage habitats, while one species that prefers open, grassland habitats appeared to decline with reclamation age, presumably due to habitat succession. Application of the MAPS protocol as a tool to evaluate and track the performance of reclaimed and disturbed habitats is demonstrated, with landbird abundance and productivity indices in natural habitats being useful indicators of equivalent land capability.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.529
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.161 · 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.

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

Citations24
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRestoration EcologySame topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207