MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973467994 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v133i1.1948

Monitoring Rock Ptarmigan (<i>Lagopus muta</i>) populations in the Western Aleutian Islands, Alaska

2019· article· en· W2973467994 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Clait E. Braun, W. P. Taylor, Steven M. Ebbert, Lisa M. Spitler

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
KeywordsLagopusVulpesArctic foxGeographyPopulationSubspeciesArcticZoologyEcologyBiologyPredationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowledge of population fluctuations of Aleutian Islands Rock Ptarmigan (Lagopus muta) is limited because of isolation and access. We reviewed the available but limited data on ptarmigan counts on islands in North America and evaluated the use of point counts to estimate changes in apparent numbers of Rock Ptarmigan on three islands (Adak, Amchitka, and Attu) in the Western Aleutian Islands in Alaska. We developed a standardized protocol to count numbers of Rock Ptarmigan (males and females) seen and/or heard on 5-minute point counts at 0.8 km intervals along marked global positioning system routes on Adak (2015–2017), Amchitka (2015), and Attu (2015) islands. Apparent densities based on Rock Ptarmigan seen and/or heard at 98 stops on 10 routes varied and were highest (1.9 birds per stop in 2015, 1.4 in 2016, and 1.0 in 2017) on Adak, lower (0.4 birds per stop) on Amchitka, and lowest (0.0 birds per stop) on Attu in late May–early June 2015. These island populations represent three subspecies and unique conservation units. Continuation of point-count surveys of these three subspecies in future years will provide baseline data over time and lead to a better understanding of any fluctuations in and synchrony among Rock Ptarmigan populations on these islands. This information is necessary for both theoretical (how are ptarmigan breeding populations regulated on islands) and practical reasons (identifying the optimal period for possible translocation to islands where ptarmigan were extirpated by introduced Arctic Fox [Vulpes lagopus]).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207