Comparison of Coastal Fringe and Interior Forests as Reserves for Marbled Murrelets on Vancouver Island
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Much of the protected habitat available to the threatened Marbled Murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus and other old-growth associated species in the Pacific Northwest is in narrow strips along the coast (e.g., parks and scenic fringes). Using data over two years from three watersheds on southwest Vancouver Island, we show that such shoreline strip forests represent suboptimal habitat for murrelets. Murrelet detections, including circling and subcanopy behaviors, were significantly lower at 30 coastal stations (20–250 m from the shoreline edge) than at 30 interior stations (1.5–21.0 km inland). Densities of predators were significantly higher at the coastal stations. The coastal trees were of similar mean height and diameter, but they had lower structural diversity and provided fewer and less suitable (thinner epiphyte cover on large boughs) nesting platforms than trees in the interior. When possible, reserves for Marbled Murrelets should be placed in interior and not shoreline forests.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".