MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010847430 · doi:10.1007/s10661-019-7925-y

Oiling of American white pelicans, common loons, and northern gannets in the winter following the Deepwater Horizon (MC252) oil spill

2019· article· en· W3010847430 on OpenAlexaff
James D. Paruk, Iain J. Stenhouse, Bryan J. Sigel, Evan M. Adams, William A. Montevecchi, David C. Evers, Andrew T. B. Gilbert, Melissa Duron, Darwin Long, Jon M. Hemming, Peter L. Tuttle

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Monitoring and Assessment · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicOil Spill Detection and Mitigation
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
KeywordsPelicanFisheryOil spillDeepwater horizonEnvironmental scienceGeographyPopulationShoreEcologyBiologyEnvironmental protection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration Trustees for the Deepwater Horizon oil spill assessed the external oiling of migratory bird species dependent on open water in the Gulf of Mexico following the aforementioned spill. The assessment was designed to evaluate birds that use open water during the winter within 40 km of the Gulf shoreline. We focused on the American white pelican (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos), common loon (Gavia immer), and northern gannet (Morus bassanus). Point counts (pelican, loon) or strip transects (gannet) were used and each target species was assessed for oiling (unoiled, trace, light, moderate, or heavy amounts) and photographed. Due to distance at sighting and/or poor visibility, not all visible birds were assessed. The percentage of birds oiled varied by species, with the common loon being the highest (23.6%), followed by American white pelican (16.9%), and northern gannet (6.9%). Most of the American white pelicans and common loons had trace (83% and 72%, respectively) or light levels (11% and 24%, respectively) of oiling. The northern gannet had just trace levels of oiling. Some pelicans (6%) and loons (4%) had moderate amounts of oiling. Based on expert derived-mortality estimates and our estimates of oil exposure, we used Monte Carlo simulations to predict expected decreases of 2.5%, 4%, and 11% in the observed population for the northern gannet, American white pelican, and common loon, respectively. While these values are underestimates of the true values given the long time lag (10-12 months) between the oil spill and the assessment, these data represent some of the few estimates of exposure for these species and describe minimum risk estimates to these 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Monitoring and AssessmentSame topicOil Spill Detection and MitigationFrench-language works237,207