Automated VHF telemetry reveals Gouldian Finches increase ranging behaviour in response to resource scarcity: implications for conservation management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Gouldian Finch (Chloebia gouldiae) relies on an annual crop of seed from Sorghum spp. and is hypothesised to face a bottleneck as this resource declines in the late dry season. This periodical seed-scarcity aligns with a reported decline in sightings, low recapture rates and an increased stress-hormone response in the species, raising concerns of increased mortality at this critical time of year. A change in behaviour in line with Optimal Foraging theory could instead explain the absence of the species from key habitats at this time of year. To test this hypothesis, we monitored the movements of 38 Gouldian Finches across a 120 km2 area using passive VHF-telemetry during periods of high and low resource availability. Our observations revealed that tagged Gouldian Finches foraged intensively within patches and infrequently moved between them in times of abundant seed. As resources declined throughout the north Australian dry season, tagged birds reduced foraging time within a patch and actively sought out new resource patches. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that Gouldian Finches adapt to grass seed scarcity by increasing their ranging behaviour. Conservation management strategies such as prescribed burning to achieve a fine-grain mosaic of grass seed diversity regionally could mitigate the need for extensive dispersal, improving conservation outcomes for the Gouldian Finch population.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".