Response of Grassland Songbirds to Grazing System Type and Range Condition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Much of the remaining prairie in Canada is grazed by cattle and most grassland birds of conservation concern occupy such habitat. Identifying vegetation features related to grassland bird habitat selection that can be easily understood and measured by professional range managers and livestock producers on private lands is an important step towards conserving and restoring remaining grasslands. We conducted grassland bird surveys on 28 native mixed-grass prairie pastures in southern Saskatchewan to determine whether grazing system type (season-long vs. rotational) influenced avian abundance. Grazing system had no influence on abundance of grassland passerines. Conservation agencies that promote particular grazing systems without consideration of recommended stocking rates, season of use and duration and frequency of grazing will likely fall short of achieving their objectives. Our results also demonstrate that intensive and rapid assessments of rangeland vegetation (i.e. range condition and visual estimation of plant vigor and residual cover, respectively) commonly used by professional range managers and ranchers may be useful indicators of abundance for horned lark (Eremophila alpestris), Sprague’s pipit (Anthus spragueii), Baird’s sparrow (Ammodramus bairdii), and Chestnut-collared longspur (Calcarius ornatus). Range condition strongly influenced Baird’s sparrow and Sprague’s pipit abundance at the pasture level and therefore may be a useful tool for identifying important breeding habitat for 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".