Urban tolerance does not protect against population decline in North American birds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Population declines of organisms are widespread and severe, but some species' populations have remained stable, or even increased. The reasons some species are less vulnerable to population decline than others are not well understood. Species that tolerate urban environments often have a broader environmental tolerance, which, along with their ability to tolerate one of the most human-modified habitats (i.e. cities), might allow them to persist in the face of diverse anthropogenic challenges. Here, we examined the relationship between urban tolerance and annual population trajectories for 397 North American bird species. Surprisingly, we found that urban tolerance was unrelated to species' population trajectories. The lack of a relationship between urban tolerance and population trajectories may reflect other factors driving population declines independent of urban tolerance, challenges that are amplified in cities (e.g. climate warming, disease), and other human impacts (e.g. conservation efforts, broad-scale land-use changes) that have benefitted some urban-avoidant species. Overall, our results illustrate that urban tolerance does not protect species against population decline.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".