Foraging behaviour of four avian species feeding on the same temporarily available prey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Low tide events provide terrestrial predators with ephemeral, but predictable and abundant sources of prey. Understanding the relationships between tidal cycles, prey availability, and predator abundances is vital to characterizing the ecological relationship between terrestrial predators and their marine prey. Here, we describe the foraging tactics of four common bird species in western North America — Bald Eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus (Linnaeus, 1766)), Great Blue Herons (Ardea herodias Linnaeus, 1758), Glaucous-winged Gulls (Larus glaucescens J.F. Naumann, 1840), and Northwestern Crows (Corvus caurinus S.F. Baird, 1858) — feeding on the same transiently accessible fish species, the plainfin midshipman (Porichthys notatus Girard, 1854). We conducted avian predator surveys at breeding beaches of plainfin midshipman across multiple years and sites. Our census data showed that Bald Eagle and Great Blue Heron abundances were higher when the tides were receding than incoming at Ladysmith Harbour, British Columbia, Canada, but the opposite trend was found for total predator abundance at a second site in Dabob Bay, Washington, USA. Glaucous-winged Gull abundance decreased over the course of the plainfin midshipman breeding season (April–July), whereas the abundances of the other three species remained stable. Our data suggest that the foraging activities of birds in the intertidal zones of western North America are linked with the tidal cycles, corresponding to periods of high prey vulnerability.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".