No effect of geolocators on apparent return rates of a declining Neotropical migrant, the Canada Warbler ( Cardellina canadensis ).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada Warblers (Cardellina canadensis) are small Neotropical migrants whose populations are declining across most of their range. Understanding factors limiting Canada Warbler populations requires knowledge of population ecology across the full annual cycle, including migratory pathways and over-winter locations. Light-level geolocator tags have offered unprecedented insight into migratory ecology for many species, but previous studies suggest that geolocators may influence apparent return rates. We sought to determine if geolocators influence apparent return rates of adult male Canada Warblers breeding in West Virginia, USA. In 2020, we deployed geolocators on 32 birds and color banded an additional 78 birds without geolocators. The following year, 13 of 32 (40.6%) geolocator birds and 37 of 78 (47.4%) color-banded birds were detected with no significant difference in apparent return rates between groups (χ² = 0.19, p = 0.66). Although further evaluation of additional groups will be valuable, the lack of significant effect on adult male Canada Warblers suggests that the slightly lower return rate does not preclude the use of geolocators as a tool to assess the migration ecology of this small songbird of conservation concern.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".