Modified Hoop-net Techniques for Capturing Birds at Sea and Comparison with Other Capture Methods
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From 2005 to 2008 we developed modified hoop-nets to capture Great and Sooty shearwaters Puffinus gravis and P. griseus, and Red-necked and Red phalaropes Phalaropus lobatus and P. fulicarius in the Bay of Fundy, Canada.Hoop-nets allowed daytime captures of more than 200 Great Shearwaters (average 3.4 birds per trip) but only 6 Sooty Shearwaters (0.1 birds per trip) without chumming.Sooty Shearwaters were captured more effectively at night using spotlights and dip-nets (approximately 1.8 birds per trip).Phalaropes (n = 17) were captured at night using spotlights and a lighter hoop-net.We caught 1.5 phalaropes per trip on average (range 0 to 8 individuals).We discuss the limitations of each technique and review reported methods used to capture other species-floating and submerged mist-nets, net-guns, castnets, spotlighting, and other hoop-nets.The main advantage of our technique is the ability to catch shearwaters without chumming.It is the only known method for capturing phalaropes at sea.Techniques described here and other at-sea capture methods allow investigators to address new questions about seabird ecology.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it