Where did the finch go? Insights from radio telemetry of the medium ground finch (<i>Geospiza fortis</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Movement patterns and habitat selection of animals have important implications for ecology and evolution. Darwin's finches are a classic model system for ecological and evolutionary studies, yet their spatial ecology remains poorly studied. We tagged and radio‐tracked five (three females, two males) medium ground finches (Geospiza fortis) to examine the feasibility of telemetry for understanding their movement and habitat use. Based on 143 locations collected during a 3‐week period, we analyzed for the first time home‐range size and habitat selection patterns of finches at El Garrapatero, an arid coastal ecosystem on Santa Cruz Island (Galápagos). The average 95% home range and 50% core area for G. fortis in the breeding season was 20.54 ha ± 4.04 ha SE and 4.03 ha ± 1.11 ha SE, respectively. For most of the finches, their home range covered a diverse set of habitats. Three finches positively selected the dry‐forest habitat, while the other habitats seemed to be either negatively selected or simply neglected by the finches. In addition, we noted a communal roosting behavior in an area close to the ocean, where the vegetation is greener and denser than the more inland dry‐forest vegetation. We show that telemetry on Darwin's finches provides valuable data to understand the movement ecology of the species. Based on our results, we propose a series of questions about the ecology and evolution of Darwin's finches that can be addressed using telemetry.
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".