Population Assessment of an Endangered Shorebird: the Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus melodus) in Eastern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Small, at-risk populations are those for which accurate demographic information is most crucial to conservation and recovery, but also where data collection is constrained by logistical challenges and small sample sizes. Migratory animals in particular may experience a wide range of threats to survival and reproduction throughout each annual cycle, and identification of life stages most critical to persistence may be especially difficult for these populations. The endangered eastern Canadian breeding population of Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus melodus) was estimated at only 444 adults in 2005, and extensive effort has been invested in conservation activities, reproductive monitoring, and marking of individual birds, providing a comprehensive data set on population dynamics since 1998. We used these data to build a matrix projection model for two Piping Plover population segments that nest in eastern Canada in order to estimate both deterministic and stochastic rates of population growth (λd and λs, respectively). Annual population censuses suggested moderate growth in abundance between 1998–2003, but vital rate estimates indicated that this temporary growth may be replaced by declines in the long term, both in southern Nova Scotia (λd = 1.0043, λs = 0.9263) and in the Gulf of St. Lawrence (λd = 0.9651, λs = 0.8214). Nonetheless, confidence intervals on λ estimates were relatively wide, highlighting remaining uncertainty in future population trajectories. Differences in projected growth between regions appear to be driven by low estimated juvenile post-fledging survival in the Gulf, but threats to juveniles of both population segments following departure from nesting beaches remain unidentified. Similarly, λ in both population segments was particularly sensitive to changes in adult survival as expected for most migratory birds, but very little is understood about the threats to Piping Plover survival during migration and overwintering. Consequently, we suggest that future recovery efforts for these and other vulnerable migrants should quantify and manage the largely unknown sources of both adult and juvenile mortality during non-breeding seasons while maintaining current levels of nesting habitat protection.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".