MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392779785 · doi:10.5751/jfo-00413-950111

Using morphometrics to sex adult and juvenile Soras ( Porzana carolina )

2024· article· en· W4392779785 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Katherine Dami, Allan McQuarrie, Meredith Lewis, Alex Pellegrini, Ayla McDonough, Gregory L. Kearns

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Field Ornithology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFish Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMorphometricsJuvenileZoologyBiologyGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determining the sex and age of individuals can be an essential element of conservation management, wildlife monitoring, and demographic analysis. For many members of the family Rallidae, distinguishing between males and females is challenging, even when the bird is in the hand. The Sora (<em>Porzana carolina</em>), a secretive rail that occupies freshwater wetlands throughout the United States and Canada, represents a species that is challenging to sex in the field. Morphometric measurements can help sex birds of an array of species, including rails. However, no comprehensive morphometric model has been fully validated for sexing Soras. We used DNA analysis to confirm the sex of Soras captured in the field and logistic regression models to determine which morphological features were the best predictors of sex. Measurements from 108 Soras (31 hatch year females (HY-F), 29 hatch year males (HY-M), 22 after hatch year females (AHY-F), and 26 after hatch year males (AHY-M) were used to create our logistic regression model. Color definition and connectivity of the auricular patch to eye or nape was used as an additional characteristic in adult birds. Our top-ranked model was further validated using a sample of 72 individuals exhibiting intermediate traits that would be particularly challenging to distinguish in the field. Our top performing model incorporated culmen length and tarsometatarsus length as the features most predictive of sex and had an overall accuracy of 85%. If higher accuracy is desired, an inconclusive band, which eliminates birds of low model score, i.e., scores indicative of inconclusive sex (below + or - 1.2), can be used. The accuracy of remaining birds (75% of sample) will be increased to 95%. Our model shows that simple measurements of culmen and tarsometatarsus is useful in discriminating the sex of a large percentage of live-caught Soras. This morphometric model will facilitate further demographic studies of this species and may be useful in designing morphometric studies of other species in the family Rallidae.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Field OrnithologySame topicFish Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207