Does perspective matter? A case study comparing Eulerian and Lagrangian estimates of common murre (<i>Uria aalge</i>) distributions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Studies estimating species' distributions require information about animal locations in space and time. Location data can be collected using surveys within a predetermined frame of reference (i.e., Eulerian sampling) or from animal‐borne tracking devices (i.e., Lagrangian sampling). Integration of observations obtained from Eulerian and Lagrangian perspectives can provide insights into animal movement and habitat use. However, contemporaneous data from both perspectives are rarely available, making examination of biases associated with each sampling approach difficult. We compared distributions of a mobile seabird observed concurrently from ship, aerial, and satellite tag surveys during May, June, and July 2012 in the northern California Current. We calculated utilization distributions to quantify and compare variability in common murre (Uria aalge) space use and examine how sampling perspective and platform influence observed patterns. Spatial distributions of murres were similar in May, regardless of sampling perspective. Greatest densities occurred in coastal waters off southern Washington and northern Oregon, near large murre colonies and the mouth of the Columbia River. Density distributions of murres estimated from ship and aerial surveys in June and July were similar to those observed in May, whereas distributions of satellite‐tagged murres in June and July indicated northward movement into British Columbia, Canada, resulting in different patterns observed from Eulerian and Lagrangian perspectives. These results suggest that the population of murres observed in the northern California Current during spring and summer includes relatively stationary individuals attending breeding colonies and nonstationary, vagile adults and subadults. Given the expected growth of telemetry studies and advances in survey technology (e.g., unmanned aerial systems), these results highlight the importance of considering methodological approaches, spatial extent, and synopticity of distribution data sets prior to integrating data from different sampling perspectives.
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 | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".