The distribution, phenology, and prey of Harlequin Ducks, Histrionicus histrionicus, in a Cascade Mountain stream, Oregon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The distribution, phenology, and prey of Harlequin Ducks, Histrionicus histrionicus, in a Cascade Mountain stream, Oregon.Canadian Field-Naturalist 114(2): 187-195.We examined the phenology, abundance, and in-stream habitat use of Harlequin Ducks (Histrionicus histrionicus) and their primary prey, the caddisfly larvae Dicosmoecus gilvipes, in a Cascade Mountain stream from 1994-1997.Harlequins and D. gilvipes inhabited the stream from late April through late July, and both frequented areas with high proportions of bedrock.When broods were present in late June and July, D. gilvipes made up over 80% of harlequin diets.Although harlequins foraged intensively on D. gilvipes, we found no direct relationship between harlequin distribution and caddisfly abundance at nine 50 m study sites.After a severe flood in early 1996, we observed reductions in overall harlequin numbers, a seasonal delay in brood development, and a decrease in abundance of D. gilvipes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".