MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390914937 · doi:10.1017/s0959270923000308

Northward migration of Red Knots <i>Calidris canutus rufa</i> and environment connectivity of southern Brazil to Canada

2024· article· en· W4390914937 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Antônio Coimbra de Brum, Júlia Victória Grohmann Finger, Richard G. Lathrop, Stephanie Feigin, Joseph A. Smith, Lawrence J. Niles, Maria Virgı́nia Petry

Bibliographic record

VenueBird Conservation International · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsCalidrisBayGeographyBird migrationCircumpolar starEcologyAmazon rainforestFisheryHabitatOceanographyBiologyArchaeologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary During their northward migration, Red Knots Calidris canutus rufa stop at the Lagoa do Peixe National Park in the extreme south of Brazil to build up fat reserves for their journey to their Canadian breeding grounds. We tracked five Red Knots with PinPoint Argos-75 GPS transmitters to investigate differences in migration strategies from this stopover. Tracked birds used two different routes: the Central Brazil route and the Brazilian Atlantic Coast route. One bird flew 8,300 km straight from Lagoa do Peixe to the Delaware Bay (USA). Another bird stopped in Maranhão (north-east Brazil) and a third one used a yet unknown environment for the species, the mouth of the Amazon River at Baía Santa Rosa, Brazil. These two birds made short flights, covering stretches of 1,600 km to 3,600 km between stop-overs, where they stayed from 4 to 18 days. Our study highlights the occurrence of intrapopulation variation in migratory strategies and reveals the connectivity of environments that are essential for the viability of rufa Red Knot populations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBird Conservation InternationalSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207