Waterfowl distribution and productivity in the Prairie Pothole Region of Canada: tools for conservation planning
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Species conservation requires an understanding of the factors and interactions affecting species distribution and behavior, habitat availability and use, and corresponding vital rates at multiple temporal and spatial scales. Opportunities to investigate these relationships across broad geographic regions are rare. We combined long‐term waterfowl population surveys, and studies of habitat use and breeding success, to develop models that identify and incorporate these interactions for upland‐nesting waterfowl in the Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of Canada. Specifically, we used data from the annual Waterfowl Breeding Population and Habitat Survey (1961–2009) at the survey segment level and associated habitat covariates to model and map the long‐term average duck density across the Canadian PPR. We analyzed nest location and fate data from approximately 25,000 duck nests found during 3 multi‐year nesting studies (1994–2011) to model factors associated with nest survival and habitat selection through the nesting season for the 5 most common upland nesting duck species: mallard ( Anas platyrhynchos ), gadwall ( Mareca strepera ), blue‐winged teal ( Spatula discors ), northern shoveler ( Spatula clypeata ), and northern pintail ( Anas acuta ). Duck density was highly variable across the Canadian PPR, reflecting positive responses to local wetland area and count, and amounts of cropland and grassland, a regional positive response to latitude, and a negative response to local amounts of tree cover. Nest survival was affected by temporal and spatial variables at multiple scales. Specifically, nest survival demonstrated interactive effects among species, nest initiation date, and nesting cover type and was influenced by relative annual wetness, population density, and surrounding landscape composition at landscape scales, and broad geographic gradients (east‐west and north‐south). Likewise, species‐specific probability of nest habitat selection was influenced by timing of nest initiation, population density, relative annual wetness, herbaceous cover, and tree cover in the surrounding landscape, and location within the Canadian PPR. We combined these models, with estimates of breeding effort (nesting, renesting, and nest attempts) from existing literature, in a stochastic conservation planning model that estimates nest distribution and success given spatiotemporal variation in duck density, habitat availability, and influential covariates. We demonstrate the use of this model by examining various conservation planning scenarios. These models allow estimation of local, landscape, and regional influence of conservation investments and other landscape changes on the productivity of breeding duck populations across the PPR of Canada. These models lay the groundwork for the incorporation of conservation delivery costs for full return‐on‐investment analyses and scenario analyses of climate, habitat, and land use change in regional and continental population models.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 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 it