Temporal changes in the diet of Tufted Ducks Aythya fuligula overwintering at Lough Neagh
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numbers of Tufted Ducks Aythya fuligula wintering at Lough Neagh declined dramatically following the winter of 2000/01. The abundance and biomass of benthic macroinvertebrates, their main food source, declined significantly between the winters of 1997/98 and 2010. Therefore, information on recent diet was required to determine if there had been any significant changes before and after the observed declines in numbers of both macroinvertebrates and birds. Here, we used oesophageal content analysis to characterise the contemporary diet of Tufted Ducks at Lough Neagh during 2010-12. Out of 75 shot ducks, only three individuals had prey items in their oesophagi while all four ducks that accidentally drowned in gill nets contained prey items. Oesophageal contents were then compared with data collected during a study conducted in the late 1990s. Contemporary diet of Tufted Ducks was dominated by Asellus aquaticus (48%), but molluscs (14%), grain (13%) and chironomid larvae (11%) were also consumed. Between 1998-99 and 2010-12, the contribution of Asellus aquaticus to the diet significantly decreased while the proportions of chironomid larvae, grain, Gammarus spp. and Mysis spp. increased. Alternative methods of dietary analysis, for example stable isotope analysis, are recommended in future studies of diving duck diet at Lough Neagh.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".