Demography of Sooty Fox Sparrows (<i>Passerella</i> <i>unalaschcensis</i>) following a shift from a migratory to resident life history
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Identifying causes and consequences of variation in species life history has the potential to improve predictions about how climate and land-use change may affect the demography and distribution of species in future. Sooty Fox Sparrows (Passerella unalaschcensis (J.F. Gmelin, 1789); or commonly grouped within the Fox Sparrow, Passerella iliaca (Merrem, 1786)) were migrants that rarely bred in the Georgia Basin of British Columbia prior to ∼1950 but have since established resident populations. Data on 270 color-banded birds and 54 nests on Mandarte Island, British Columbia, allowed us to estimate demographic vital rates and population growth in one recently established population. Annual fecundity (F), estimated as the product of the number of broods initiated (1.5 ± 0.01; mean ± SD), clutch size (2.82 ± 0.44), and probability of survival to fledging (0.68 ± 0.02), exceeded values reported for migrants, supporting the hypothesis that residents invest more in reproduction, on average, than migrants within species. Estimating juvenile and adult overwinter survival (Sj = 0.32 ± 0.06 and Sa = 0.69 ± 0.05) next allowed us to simulate an expected distribution of population growth rates as λexp = Sa + (Sj × F), given parameter error. Our estimate of λexp (1.61 ± 0.57) implies expeditious population growth, consistent with the species’ recent colonization of the region.
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) | 0.000 | 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".