Combining community science and MaxEnt modeling to estimate Wild Turkey ( Meleagris gallopavo ) winter abundance and distribution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the distribution and abundance of species is a fundamental aspect of conservation biology. Species distribution models aim to predict distributions based on species observations and ecologically relevant information. To understand the contemporary distribution of Wild Turkeys (<em>Meleagris gallopavo</em>) in Ontario, we curated and collated Wild Turkey flock observations from eBird and iNaturalist submitted during winter 2018. We combined these with environmental predictors to build distribution models using MaxEnt and evaluated model fit using 10-fold cross validation. We also estimated total population size for this species under different modeling scenarios. The potential presence of unknown spatial bias in community science datasets is a complex problem often requiring context-specific statistical solutions. Data cleaning, sometimes referred to as thinning, filtering, or culling, is often proposed to manage this bias. As such, we tested the effect of data cleaning on model outputs and on subsequent analyses. We evaluated all models using area under the curve (AUC). We found building density to be the most important environmental variable followed by winter severity. We validated our habitat suitability estimates using fine-scale GPS data and found that data cleaning had no effect on habitat suitability estimates inside available Wild Turkey habitat or inside core-use areas, except at one site in 2012 (t = -2.2, P = 0.04, df = 14). Use of community collected data offers a cost-efficient and collaborative method to obtain data for species distribution modeling and management. We discuss implications for Wild Turkey management and present potential contemporary distribution maps for this species.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".