Decades of monitoring plastic pollution in seabirds in Canada: Spatial, temporal, and methodological insights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plastic ingestion by seabirds is an increasing issue worldwide, yet species can vary in ingestion based on ecological and morphological differences. This provokes the ecological question of which species are better suited to monitor plastic ingestion across regions and time. In Canada, we examined plastic ingestion in sympatric northern fulmars (Fulmarus glacialis), black-legged kittiwakes (Rissa tridactyla), thick-billed murres (Uria lomvia), and black guillemots (Cepphus grylle). Here, we present new data and compare to historical work to inform plastic pollution monitoring in Canada. In 2021, 51 % of fulmars, 7 % of kittiwakes and 7 % of murres contained plastic, whereas guillemots had no pieces >1 mm. Regardless of the methods used to collect and process samples, fulmars continue to have low levels of ingestion compared to the European Arctic, but high levels compared to other species in the Canadian Arctic, emphasizing their continued utility as a monitoring tool for plastic pollution in Canada.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".