Data from: Identification of migratory bird flyways in North America using community detection on biological networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Migratory behavior of waterfowl populations in North America has traditionally been broadly characterized by four north-south flyways, and these flyways have been central to the management of waterfowl populations for more than 80 years. However, previous flyway characterizations are not easily updated with current bird movement data and fail to provide assessments of the importance of specific geographical regions to the identification of flyways. Here, we developed a network model of migratory movement for four waterfowl species —mallard (Anas platyrhnchos), northern pintail (A. acuta), American green-winged teal (A. carolinensis), and Canada goose (Branta canadensis) — in North America using bird band and recovery data. We then identified migratory flyways using a community detection algorithm and characterize the importance of smaller geographic regions in identifying flyways using a novel metric, the consolidation factor. We identified four main flyways for mallards, northern pintails, and American green-winged teal with the flyway identification in Canada geese exhibiting higher complexity. For mallards, flyways were relatively consistent through time. However, consolidation factors revealed that for mallards and green-winged teal the presumptive Mississippi flyway was potentially a zone of high mixing between other flyways. Our results demonstrate that the network approach provides a robust method for flyway identification that is widely applicable given the relatively minimal data requirements and is easily updated with future movement data to reflect changes in flyway definitions and management goals.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".