Predation risk and resource availability explain roost locations of Whimbrel <i>Numenius phaeopus</i> in a tropical mangrove delta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Roosts are important sites for shorebirds in non‐breeding areas at night and during high tides. How the spatial configuration of food and risk of predation and disturbance influence roost site use in tropical locations remains poorly known. We analysed the locations of nocturnal roosts of Whimbrel Numenius phaeopus in mangroves of Sanquianga National Park, Colombia, with respect to variation in spatial variables related to food resources and risk of predation and disturbance. We contrasted characteristics of all 13 known nocturnal roost locations with those of all other mangrove islands (n = 209) within the limits of the park. We estimated the distance from roosts and other mangrove islands to foraging sites, and sources of predators and human disturbance. Larger areas of feeding habitat surrounded nocturnal roosts than other mangrove islands, and the average distance to individual feeding patches was shorter. Roosts were also more isolated than other islands, but proximity to sources of human disturbance did not differ. We conclude that Whimbrel roost site use in Sanquianga was best explained by a combination of access to feeding territories and isolation from potential sources of mainland predators, but not by avoidance of human disturbance. Beyond identifying factors influencing roost site selection, the large aggregations of individuals in single locations may suggest that presence of conspecifics itself also plays a role in the formation of Whimbrel roosts. We highlight the interaction of food and risk landscapes with intraspecific attraction on the roost site selection by Whimbrels and the importance of mangroves as roosting sites in tropical regions.
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 | 0.000 | 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".