MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403342310 · doi:10.1675/063.047.0203

Bald Eagle and Priority Sea Ducks Interact Over Space and Time in the Salish Sea: A Transboundary Perspective

2024· article· en· W4403342310 on OpenAlexaffabout
Danielle M. Ethier, Pete Davidson, David W. Bradley

Bibliographic record

VenueWaterbirds · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsBirds Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBald eaglePerspective (graphical)EagleGeographyFisheryEcologyBiologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sea ducks are considered vital indicators of ecosystem health yet are experiencing long-term abundance declines in the transboundary waters of the Salish Sea in Canada and the United States. Identifying the mechanisms driving changes in abundance or causing redistributions within this region necessitates a transboundary effort. Our analysis compiled data from both the British Columbia Coastal Waterbird Survey (BCCWS) and the Puget Sound Seabird Survey (PSSS) between 2009–2022 to assess broad-scale predator-prey interactions between Bald Eagles and priority sea ducks, using a multispecies occupancy model. Our results suggest that Bald Eagles more often than chance overlap with priority sea ducks in the Salish Sea. However, there was no evidence of second-order effects of latitude, longitude, or year on sea duck occurrence in the presence or absence of Bald Eagles, suggesting that these factors are acting independently. Our results not only help resource managers better understand the broad-scale interplay between predators and prey and the co-occurrence probability of priority sea ducks, but this analytical framework and data resource compilation also provide researchers with a foundation from which multi-species interactions and the mechanisms responsible can be disentangled across these transboundary waters.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.237 · 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.

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterbirdsSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207