MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794024099 · doi:10.1080/11956860.2018.1427309

Small between-year variations in nest predation rates are not related with between-year differences in predator identity

2018· article· en· W2794024099 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Katrine S. Hoset, Magne Husby

Bibliographic record

VenueEcoscience · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredationPredatorNest (protein structural motif)EcologyBiologyTaiga

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nest predation is one of the most important causes of nest failure in breeding birds and can vary extensively between sites and years. Different mechanisms governing predation rates may dominate in different years and this annual variation should therefore be evaluated directly. Here we document year-to-year variation in nest predation rates in two ecosystems (forest and salt meadows) within the mid-boreal forest zone to evaluate whether annual variation in nest predation rates are linked with annual variation in predator identity or the ratio between predator types. Year-to-year variation in predation rates was low in all experiments (non-significant differences in experiments 1 and 2), with a significant decrease only from 2005 (0.90%) to 2008 (0.70%), 2009 (0.65%) and 2010 (0.72%) in experiment 3. In addition, random intercept estimates indicated that two sites from experiment 1 showed higher predation rates in year 2 than in year 1. None of these differences were related with differences in apparent predator community structure or predator identity. This suggests that low between-year variation in nest predation rates may be common in areas where the predator communities are stable, and the existing variation cannot be explained by variation in predator identity alone.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.220 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcoscienceSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207