Range‐wide sources of variation in reproductive rates of northern spotted owls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We conducted a range-wide investigation of the dynamics of site-level reproductive rate of northern spotted owls using survey data from 11 study areas across the subspecies geographic range collected during 1993-2018. Our analytical approach accounted for imperfect detection of owl pairs and misclassification of successful reproduction (i.e., at least one young fledged) and contributed further insights into northern spotted owl population ecology and dynamics. Both nondetection and state misclassification were important, especially because factors affecting these sources of error also affected focal ecological parameters. Annual probabilities of site occupancy were greatest at sites with successful reproduction in the previous year and lowest for sites not occupied by a pair in the previous year. Site-specific occupancy transition probabilities declined over time and were negatively affected by barred owl presence. Overall, the site-specific probability of successful reproduction showed substantial year-to-year fluctuations and was similar for occupied sites that did or did not experience successful reproduction the previous year. Site-specific probabilities for successful reproduction were very small for sites that were unoccupied the previous year. Barred owl presence negatively affected the probability of successful reproduction by northern spotted owls in Washington and California, as predicted, but the effect in Oregon was mixed. The proportions of sites occupied by northern spotted owl pairs showed steep, near-monotonic declines over the study period, with all study areas showing the lowest observed levels of occupancy to date. If trends continue it is likely that northern spotted owls will become extirpated throughout large portions of their range in the coming decades.
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) | 0.005 | 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".