MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391364246

Assessing breeding duck population trends relative to anthropogenic disturbances across the boreal plains of Canada, 1960-2007

2020· article· en· W4391364246 on OpenAlexaffabout
Howard V. Singer, Stuart M. Slattery, Llwellyn M. Armstrong, Susan Witherly

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsDucks Unlimited Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBorealGeographyPopulationEnvironmental scienceEcologyPhysical geographyBiologyDemographyArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Impacts of anthropogenic disturbance on duck populations in the boreal forest is largely unknown but hypothesized to negatively influence abundance through top-down and bottom-up processes. We examined relationships between population trajectory of duck pairs and anthropogenic disturbances in the Boreal Plains ecozone of western Canada by first controlling for habitat and then assessing whether population trends were related to density of seismic lines, pipelines, roads, and well sites, and distance to agriculture to help focus conservation efforts on the most limiting changes. We also evaluated whether these relationships differed in agriculture encroached vs. unencroached landscapes; distance to agriculture was assessed in unencroached landscapes. Pair counts (1960-2007) obtained from the Waterfowl Breeding Population and Habitat Survey were pooled into nesting guilds (cavity, ground, and overwater). All anthropogenic disturbance features were time invariant. Annual moisture data was used to control for effects of annual variation in breeding season weather. Variation in relative magnitude and direction of effect size indices among anthropogenic disturbances depended on both landscape and nesting guild. Overall, majority of negative relationships occurred with seismic lines and pipelines, while distance to agriculture was positive. Population trends for ground nesters, which suggest overall declines, tended be most negative in regions with high seismic line and well pad density in encroached landscapes and with high seismic line and pipeline density in unencroached landscapes. Cavity nester population trends were generally positive throughout the study area but were lowest in unencroached landscapes farthest from agriculture. Overwater nester trends were generally lowest in encroached landscapes with high densities of seismic lines, roads, and well pads and in unencroached landscapes with high densities of seismic lines, pipelines, and roads. Although our work suggests that anthropogenic disturbances, particularly seismic and pipelines, may merit further consideration as foci for conservation, additional research is needed to quantify demographic implications.

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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicRangeland and Wildlife ManagementFrench-language works237,207