Status and trends of tundra birds across the circumpolar Arctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tundra-breeding birds face diverse conservation challenges, from accelerated rates of Arctic climate change to threats associated with highly migratory life histories. Here we summarise the status and trends of Arctic terrestrial birds (88 species, 228 subspecies or distinct flyway populations) across guilds/regions, derived from published sources, raw data or, in rare cases, expert opinion. We report long-term trends in vital rates (survival, reproduction) for the handful of species and regions for which these are available. Over half of all circumpolar Arctic wader taxa are declining (51% of 91 taxa with known trends) and almost half of all waterfowl are increasing (49% of 61 taxa); these opposing trends have fostered a shift in community composition in some locations. Declines were least prevalent in the African-Eurasian Flyway (29%), but similarly prevalent in the remaining three global flyways (44-54%). Widespread, and in some cases accelerating, declines underscore the urgent conservation needs faced by many Arctic terrestrial bird species.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".