The coastal breeding habitat of Bank Swallows (<i>Riparia riparia</i>) in an Atlantic Canada National Park: assessing habitat use in relation to availability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding bird habitat selection has become a priority in conservation, particularly for bird species facing long-term population declines. The Bank Swallow ( Riparia riparia (Linnaeus, 1758)), a species whose eastern distribution limit is in Atlantic Canada, declined by 98% between 1970 and 2011, prompting its listing as a threatened species in 2017. Its decline is hypothesized to be due in part to habitat loss and, hence, this study aimed to identify critical habitats within a protected area along Prince Edward Island. We used two types of survey to examine the availability and use of three breeding habitats: dunes, glacial till, and sandstone cliffs. A goodness-of-fit test revealed that the habitats were not used in proportion to their availability. Among them sandstone cliffs and, to a lesser extent, till cliffs were used significantly more than expected (i.e., selected). Instead, sand dunes were used less (i.e., avoided) as a breeding habitat. These results suggest that Bank Swallow selection is driven by characteristics associated with the sandstone and till habitats, and more attention and possibly protection should be given to them. Further studies should also explore whether similar patterns of selection are evident in the region’s historical records and in similar coastline areas.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".