Broad‐scale changes in tundra‐nesting bird abundance in response to hyperabundant geese
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Environmental changes can propagate through food webs in complex ways via trophic cascades. In the North American Arctic, hyperabundant populations of geese are causing significant habitat change and the resulting trophic cascades are known to impact plant and invertebrate communities. However, the potential impacts on other tundra‐nesting birds are not fully understood. Here, we evaluate the impacts of light geese (Snow Geese, Chen caerulescens, and Ross’ Goose, Chen rossii ) populations on other tundra‐nesting birds, using count data collected during bird surveys conducted at varying distances from light goose colonies across the Canadian Arctic. From a dataset of 920 12–16 ha plots distributed across the Canadian Arctic, we identified 527 that were within 200 km of the mapped extent of known light goose colonies. After accounting for regional variation, we demonstrate that densities of most Cover‐Nesting Shorebirds and passerines are depressed in the vicinity of light goose colonies. We suggest that these trends are the results of the combined effects of goose‐induced changes in habitat and predator–prey interactions. These direct and indirect effects of light geese could be contributing to the declines experienced by some tundra‐nesting bird populations in parts of their range. Ongoing climate‐related changes to habitat, predators, and arthropods could interact with this effect of geese to further alter the suitability of tundra habitats for Arctic‐breeding birds, in additive or even unanticipated ways.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.013 | 0.024 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".