MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2610646081 · doi:10.14288/1.0343445

Foraging ecology of Endangered Williamson’s Sapsuckers in Canada : multi-scale habitat selection in two biogeoclimatic zones

2017· article· en· W2610646081 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Julien St‐Amand

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForagingEndangered speciesHabitatGeographyScale (ratio)Selection (genetic algorithm)EcologyFisheryBiologyComputer scienceCartographyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Williamson’s Sapsuckers are Endangered woodpeckers in Canada that breed in montane forests only in British Columbia and require protection of their critical habitat. While there is reasonable knowledge of their distribution and nesting habitat requirements, there are knowledge gaps regarding foraging habitat of Williamson’s Sapsuckers. I investigated the selection of foraging habitat in managed forest at the foraging substrate and patch scales using visual observations of foraging behaviour of 27 radio-tagged Williamson’s Sapsuckers in the two biogeoclimatic zones where they are found in Canada, the Montane Spruce and Interior Douglas-fir. The characteristics of foraging trees differed with foraging mode and nesting status, but not with bird gender or age. Williamson’s Sapsuckers preferred large live Douglas-fir (> 22.5 cm dbh) for gleaning and sap feeding in both biogeoclimatic zones, while trees used for pecking were mostly large dying western larch in the Montane Spruce zone and large dead ponderosa pine in the Interior Douglas-fir zone. At the foraging patch scale, Williamson’s Sapsuckers did not prefer any stand-level characteristics in the Montane Spruce zone, while in the Interior Douglas-fir zone, they selected foraging patches with higher densities of their preferred foraging substrate (i.e., large live Douglas-fir). Areas of open habitat and single trees were avoided during foraging trips in both biogeoclimatic zones and this habitat type was found in significantly lower proportions in the Montane Spruce than in the Interior Douglas-fir zone. Williamson’s Sapsuckers showed no significant preferences for within-stand configuration characteristics (retained groups, forest edges, open stands and closed stands) in the Montane Spruce zone, but they preferred foraging along forest edges and in closed stands in the Interior Douglas-fir zone. I used foraging trip distances to recommend nest reserve (no-logging; 0-140 m from the nest) and nest management zones. For the nest management zone, I recommend only partial harvesting with retained groups of trees extending from 140-340 m in the Montane Spruce zone and from 140-410 m in the Interior Douglas-fir zone. My study on Williamson’s Sapsuckers is the first to provide a comprehensive representation of foraging habitat requirements for the 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→