Distribution, abundance, and status of the Greater Sage-Grouse, Centrocercus urophasianus, in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We reviewed the historic and present distribution of Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) in Canada and found that the species has been eliminated from approximately 90% of its estimated historic distribution. Sage-grouse have been extirpated from British Columbia and reduced to remnant populations in Alberta and Saskatchewan. Estimates of the size of the population decline in Canada range from 66 to 92% over the last 30 years based on currently occupied habitat. As a result, sage grouse have been listed as Endangered in both Alberta and Saskatchewan by provincial governments and federally in Canada by COSEWIC. Intensive surveys from 1994 to 1999 in both provinces suggest that the 1999 spring breeding population had declined to between 813 and 1204 individuals. The number of active lek sites has continued to decline, suggesting that some habitats have become unsuitable to support viable sage-grouse populations. Number of yearling males recruiting to leks each spring has been low, suggesting that production and overwinter survival of young are the major problems related to the decline. Low chick survival rate, with only 18% surviving to 50 days of age, is the most likely parameter contributing to the population decline. These declines could be related to one or any combination of habitat changes, livestock grazing pressure, oil and gas developments, or climate change, all of which could lead to increased predation rates and decreased survival. It is questionable if the present population of sage-grouse in Canada is large enough to remain viable.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".