MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3023603859 · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-63312-0

Arctic avian predators synchronise their spring migration with the northern progression of snowmelt

2020· article· en· W3023603859 on OpenAlexafffund
Teja Curk, Ivan Pokrovsky, Nicolas Lecomte, Tomas Aarvak, David F. Brinker, Kurt K. Burnham, A.J. Dietz, Andrew Dixon, Alastair Franke, Gilles Gauthier, Karl‐Otto Jacobsen, Jeff Kidd, Stephen B. Lewis, Ingar Jostein Øien, Aleksandr Sokolov, Vasiliy Sokolov, Roar Solheim, Scott Weidensaul, Karen L. Wiebe, Martin Wikelski, Jean‐François Therrien, Kamran Safi

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCenter for Northern StudiesUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de Moncton
FundersInternational Max Planck Research School for Advanced Methods in Process and Systems EngineeringMiljødirektoratetOffield Family FoundationAlaska Department of Fish and GameHawk Mountain Sanctuary AssociationPeregrine FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Forest ServiceMassachusetts Department of Fish and Game
KeywordsSnowmeltTundraSnowArcticEcologyBuzzardPredationArctic foxHabitatFacultativeGeographyEnvironmental sciencePhysical geographyBiologyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Migratory species display a range of migration patterns between irruptive (facultative) to regular (obligate), as a response to different predictability of resources. In the Arctic, snow directly influences resource availability. The causes and consequences of different migration patterns of migratory species as a response to the snow conditions remains however unexplored. Birds migrating to the Arctic are expected to follow the spring snowmelt to optimise their arrival time and select for snow-free areas to maximise prey encounter en-route. Based on large-scale movement data, we compared the migration patterns of three top predator species of the tundra in relation to the spatio-temporal dynamics of snow cover. The snowy owl, an irruptive migrant, the rough-legged buzzard, with an intermediary migration pattern, and the peregrine falcon as a regular migrant, all followed, as expected, the spring snowmelt during their migrations. However, the owl stayed ahead, the buzzard stayed on, and the falcon stayed behind the spatio-temporal peak in snowmelt. Although none of the species avoided snow-covered areas, they presumably used snow presence as a cue to time their arrival at their breeding grounds. We show the importance of environmental cues for species with different migration patterns.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations29
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change→French-language works237,207→