MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280551089 · doi:10.1002/eap.2679

Integrating data types to estimate spatial patterns of avian migration across the Western Hemisphere

2022· article· en· W4280551089 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy D. Meehan, Sarah P. Saunders, William V. DeLuca, Nicole L. Michel, Joanna Grand, Jill L. Deppe, Miguel F. Jimenez, Erika J. Knight, Nathaniel E. Seavy, Melanie Smith, Lotem Taylor, Chad Witko, Michael E. Akresh, David R. Barber, Erin M. Bayne, James C. Beasley, Jerrold L. Belant, Richard O. Bierregaard, Keith L. Bildstein, Than J. Boves, John N. Brzorad, Steven Campbell, Antonio Celis‐Murillo, Hilary A. Cooke, Robert Domenech, Laurie J. Goodrich, Elizabeth A. Gow, Aaron M. Haines, Michael T. Hallworth, Jason M. Hill, Amanda E. Holland, Scott Jennings, Roland Kays, D. Tommy King, Stuart A. Mackenzie, Peter P. Marra, Rebecca A. McCabe, Kent P. McFarland, Michael McGrady, Ron Melcer, D. Ryan Norris, Russell E. Norvell, Olin E. Rhodes, Christopher C. Rimmer, Amy L. Scarpignato, Adam Shreading, Jesse L. Watson, Chad B. Wilsey

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Applications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsBirds CanadaWildlife Conservation Society CanadaUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreeding bird surveyBird migrationGeneralized additive modelEcologyGeographyHabitatPhysical geographyCartographyComputer scienceBiologyMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For many avian species, spatial migration patterns remain largely undescribed, especially across hemispheric extents. Recent advancements in tracking technologies and high-resolution species distribution models (i.e., eBird Status and Trends products) provide new insights into migratory bird movements and offer a promising opportunity for integrating independent data sources to describe avian migration. Here, we present a three-stage modeling framework for estimating spatial patterns of avian migration. First, we integrate tracking and band re-encounter data to quantify migratory connectivity, defined as the relative proportions of individuals migrating between breeding and nonbreeding regions. Next, we use estimated connectivity proportions along with eBird occurrence probabilities to produce probabilistic least-cost path (LCP) indices. In a final step, we use generalized additive mixed models (GAMMs) both to evaluate the ability of LCP indices to accurately predict (i.e., as a covariate) observed locations derived from tracking and band re-encounter data sets versus pseudo-absence locations during migratory periods and to create a fully integrated (i.e., eBird occurrence, LCP, and tracking/band re-encounter data) spatial prediction index for mapping species-specific seasonal migrations. To illustrate this approach, we apply this framework to describe seasonal migrations of 12 bird species across the Western Hemisphere during pre- and postbreeding migratory periods (i.e., spring and fall, respectively). We found that including LCP indices with eBird occurrence in GAMMs generally improved the ability to accurately predict observed migratory locations compared to models with eBird occurrence alone. Using three performance metrics, the eBird + LCP model demonstrated equivalent or superior fit relative to the eBird-only model for 22 of 24 species-season GAMMs. In particular, the integrated index filled in spatial gaps for species with over-water movements and those that migrated over land where there were few eBird sightings and, thus, low predictive ability of eBird occurrence probabilities (e.g., Amazonian rainforest in South America). This methodology of combining individual-based seasonal movement data with temporally dynamic species distribution models provides a comprehensive approach to integrating multiple data types to describe broad-scale spatial patterns of animal movement. Further development and customization of this approach will continue to advance knowledge about the full annual cycle and conservation of migratory birds.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.292 · 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.

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

Citations37
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological ApplicationsSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207