MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199764184 · doi:10.3389/fevo.2021.698175

Reconstructing Long-Term Changes in Avian Populations Using Lake Sediments: Opening a Window Onto the Past

2021· article· en· W3199764184 on OpenAlexafffund
Matthew P. Duda, Kathryn E. Hargan, Neal Michelutti, Jules M. Blais, Christopher Grooms, H. Grant Gilchrist, Mark L. Mallory, Gregory J. Robertson, John P. Smol

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Ecology and Evolution · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaAcadia UniversityUniversity of OttawaMemorial University of NewfoundlandQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPopulationEcologyClimate changePaleolimnologyEnvironmental changeGlobal changeEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The lack of long-term monitoring data for many wildlife populations is a limiting factor in establishing meaningful and achievable conservation goals. Even for well-monitored species, time series are often very short relative to the timescales required to understand a population’s baseline conditions before the contemporary period of increased human impacts. To fill in this critical information gap, techniques have been developed to use sedimentary archives to provide insights into long-term population dynamics over timescales of decades to millennia. Lake and pond sediments receiving animal inputs (e.g., feces, feathers) typically preserve a record of ecological and environmental information that reflects past changes in population size and dynamics. With a focus on bird-related studies, we review the development and use of several paleolimnological proxies to reconstruct past colony sizes, including trace metals, isotopes, lipid biomolecules, diatoms, pollen and non-pollen palynomorphs, invertebrate sub-fossils, pigments, and others. We summarize how animal-influenced sediments, cored from around the world, have been successfully used in addressing some of the most challenging questions in conservation biology, namely: How dynamic are populations on long-term timescales? How may populations respond to climate change? How have populations responded to human intrusion? Finally, we conclude with an assessment of the current state of the field, challenges to overcome, and future potential for research.

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 score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.836

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations34
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Ecology and EvolutionSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207