Prey and reproduction in a metapopulation decline among Swainson's Hawks, Buteo swainsoni
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prey and reproduction in a metapopulation decline among Swainson's Hawks, Buteo swainsoni.Canadian Field-Naturalist 115(2): 257-273.Populations and productivity of Swainson's Hawks (Buteo swainsoni) have declined for a decade at two study areas (Hanna, Alberta, and Kindersley -Alsask, Saskatchewan) near the northern edge of their Great Plains breeding range.Near Hanna, reproduction in successful nests appeared stable through 1990 and then declined by 31%, followed by a hawk population drop in 1995 and 1996.In Saskatchewan, reproduction began to decline in 1988 and reached unprecedented low levels in 1993 and 1996, followed by a noticeable drop in hawk populations beginning in 1994.In both areas, Richardson's Ground Squirrels (Spermophilus richardsonii), the hawks' main prey, have declined drastically in numbers, forcing the hawks to prey more often on ducklings, songbirds and corvids.Forty Swainson's Hawks, marked as nestlings, bred on or near the Hanna study area, including five which moved from Saskatchewan.Recruitment of known-age breeders at Hanna was low at 4.4% of the breeding population, perhaps because the open prairie, which lacks geographic barriers, facilitates wide dispersal.The observed declines of this hawk and other species of grassland birds are of interest because they coincided with pervasive changes in the prairie ecosystem, especially an increasing use of biocides and fertilizers.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".