Using drone imagery to obtain population data of colony-nesting seabirds to support Canada’s transition to the global Key Biodiversity Areas program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Identifying of global or national biodiversity ‘hotspots’ has proven important for focusing and prioritizing conservation efforts worldwide. Canada has nearly 600 Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs) identified by quantitative criteria to help guide avian conservation and management. Marine IBAs capture critical waterbird habitats such as nesting colonies, foraging sites, and staging areas. However, due to their remote locations, many lack recent population counts. Canada has begun transitioning IBAs into the global Key Biodiversity Areas (KBA) program; KBAs identify areas that are important for the persistence of biodiversity and encompass a wider scope of unique, rare, or vulnerable taxa. Assessing whether IBAs qualify as KBAs requires current data – as will future efforts to manage these biologically important sites. We conducted a pilot study in the Chain Islets and Great Chain Island IBA, in British Columbia, to assess the effectiveness of using drones to census surface-nesting seabirds in an IBA context. This IBA was originally designated for supporting a globally significant breeding colony of Glaucous-winged Gulls (Larus glaucescens). Total nest counts derived from orthomosaic imagery (1012 nesting pairs) show that this site now falls below the Global and National IBA designation criterion threshold, a finding consistent with regional declines in the species. Our trial successfully demonstrates a flexible and low cost approach to obtaining population data at an ecologically sensitive KBA site. We explore how drones will be a useful tool to assess and monitor species and habitats within remote, data-deficient IBAs, particularly during the transition to KBAs.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".