AN UPDATE ON MORTALITY OF FLEDGED WHOOPING CRANES IN THE ARANSAS / WOOD BUFFALO POPULATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From winter 1950 through spring 2011, 6,364 whooping cranes (Grus americana) overwintered at Aransas National Wildlife Refuge, or rarely, elsewhere. Documented winter losses amounted to 105 birds dead or disappeared. About 20% of total losses occurred in the wintering area, where birds spend 5 to 6 months of the year including a few birds that over-summer. Losses of white-plumaged whooping cranes on the summering area in Canada appear to be low with only 3 instances documented. The most significant losses seem to occur in migration and may comprise over 80% of the annual mortality. Migration involves only 17-20% of the annual cycle but is a period when losses are high because birds are exposed to new hazards as they travel through mostly unfamiliar environments. This paper updates a similar account by Lewis et al. (1992) by adding mortality records of the Aransas/Wood Buffalo population (AWBP) from 1987 through 2010 with information on 50 recovered carcasses.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".