MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399387008 · doi:10.3996/jfwm-23-051

Cohort-Specific Differential Vulnerability to Capture of Mallards and Wood Ducks in Baited Swim-in Traps

2024· article· en· W4399387008 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony J. Roberts, David L. Fronczak, Frank Baldwin, Clayton Ferrell, Heath M. Hagy, Steven M. Olson, Garnet Raven, Joseph P. Sands, Michael L. Szymanski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish and Wildlife Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsAlberta Environment and Protected AreasCanadian Women's Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCohortVulnerability (computing)BiologyFisheryEcologyZoologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Attaching leg bands to birds directly before fall hunting seasons is a primary component of monitoring waterfowl in North America. Although capture and recovery data are primarily used for estimating survival and harvest distribution, these data may be used to estimate age ratios and other demographic rates, especially if recapture data are available from subsequent trapping and release events. We estimated recapture rates of mallards Anas platyrhynchos and wood ducks Aix sponsa and used those rates to estimate differential capture vulnerability, which is vital to estimate true age ratios from banding data. Posterior estimates of mallard age and sex cohorts and location-specific recapture rates varied among capture locations from a mean of 0.004 (0.002–0.008 95% credible interval) to 0.547 (0.486–0.609). Ratios of recapture rates among cohorts also varied, meaning no single differential vulnerability estimate would be useable across the study area. Our estimates of differential capture vulnerability for mallards, using the ratio of recapture probabilities, averaged 2.64 for adult female to adult male and 5.42 for juvenile female to adult female, with significant variation. Wood duck cohort-specific recapture rates were similar across locations. Similar wood duck recapture rates resulted in similar estimates of differential vulnerability, 1.24 for the ratio of adult female to adult male and 1.30 for juvenile female to adult female. The wide range of recapture rate estimates we found for mallards suggests that location-specific characteristics may have a strong effect on capture probability. Differences in recapture rates and apparent survival likely resulting from emigration suggest that if recapture data are to be used in population modeling, location-specific information is needed. The ability to monitor multiple demographic parameters using a single scheme improves continued assessment of population status. We recommend increased collection of in-season recapture data by biologists during active banding operations. Banders should be aware of the potential value of live, in-season encounters in monitoring populations and modeling demographic rates.

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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.441

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish and Wildlife ManagementSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207