Changes to the Population Status of Horned Grebes (<i>Podiceps auritus</i>) and Red-necked Grebes (<i>Podiceps grisegena</i>) in Southwestern Manitoba, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Continental trend data for North America suggest that Horned Grebe (Podiceps auritus) breeding populations are declining and Red-necked Grebe (P. grisegena) populations are increasing. However, data reliability is low due to lack of survey routes in the northern boreal and taiga ecozones, areas encompassing much of the breeding range of both species. Locally in the southern Manitoba prairie ecozone, reliability of long-term trend data is also considered low and these data suggest that Horned Grebe populations are declining faster than the continental trend and that Red-necked Grebe populations are increasing rapidly. The lack of current quantitative information on population densities of these two species in southern Manitoba prompted me to compare 1970s historical data from two sites to recent data collected at the same locations in 2008–2016. I surveyed 42 (1970–1972) and 38 (2008–2016), and 144 (2009–2015) Class III-V wetlands at Erickson and Minnedosa, Manitoba, respectively. Historical Minnedosa data were available from previous field studies. At both locations, Horned Grebe breeding populations have fallen significantly, and Red-necked Grebe populations have risen significantly since the 1970s. The results of this study corroborate the Breeding Bird Survey’s trend data for Horned and Red-necked Grebes in southwestern Manitoba pothole habitat.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".