MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407819161 · doi:10.1017/s0959270925000024

Differences in breeding phenology between two geographically separated populations of the ʻuaʻu (Hawaiian Petrel <i>Pterodroma sandwichensis</i>)

2025· article· en· W4407819161 on OpenAlexaff
André F. Raine, Scott Driskill, R. Sprague, J. Rothe, Giovanna Cáceres, Justin G. Schuetz, Mike McFarlin, Marc Travers

Bibliographic record

VenueBird Conservation International · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsDepartment of Environment and Conservation
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceNational Fish and Wildlife Foundation
KeywordsZoologyPetrelGeographyBiologyEcologySeabird

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The ʻuaʻu, or Hawaiian Petrel Pterodroma sandwichensis , is an endangered seabird endemic to the Hawaiian Islands. Genetic, morphometric, and behavioural differences have previously been found between different island populations of the species. Understanding the breeding phenology of different populations of ʻuaʻu is therefore vital for conservation actions targeting the species. To assess breeding phenology of ʻuaʻu on the islands of Kauaʻi and Lānaʻi, two main techniques were used over a 12-year period: direct burrow monitoring and burrow cameras. The breeding phenology of the ʻuaʻu is described based on this data. On Kauaʻi, breeding birds arrive in the middle of April, undergo an exodus of approximately one month, and return to lay in the beginning of June. Incubation continues until early August, followed by chick-rearing, which ends on average two weeks before the chick fledges. Fledging starts in mid-October, peaks in mid-November, and ends in the third week of December. Lānaʻi birds arrive two weeks earlier and fledge one week earlier than on Kauaʻi. On both islands breeding was asynchronous with a 68-day (Kauaʻi) and 48-day (Lānaʻi) gap between first and last fledging birds. Considering phenology data across its entire Hawaiian range, ʻuaʻu first arrive on east Maui, then Lānaʻi, Hawaiʻi Island, and Kauaʻi in that order. These differences in timing presumably reflect and/or reinforce genetic differentiation between subpopulations of the species. The utility of this information is discussed in terms of directing management actions towards key periods of vulnerability to introduced predators, including peak incubation, chick emergence, and chick exercise periods. Description of island-specific phenologies is also critical to inform efforts to rescue fledglings disoriented by artificial light, mitigate powerline collisions, and refine existing monitoring and restoration projects. Future work using acoustic monitoring and data collected at social attraction sites is recommended for assessing the phenology of non-breeders at colonies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBird Conservation InternationalSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207