MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6894190743 · doi:10.5441/001/1.hr82ph6n/1

Marbled Murrelets at Desolation Sound British Columbia Canada (1998-2001)

2022· dataset· en· W6894190743 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMovebank · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeabirdSound (geography)ForagingNest (protein structural motif)Range (aeronautics)Marbled meatHome range

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Marbled Murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus is a threatened seabird that relies on old-growth forest for nesting. We compare marine space use between breeding and non-breeding birds, and how marine home range locations and overlap vary with respect to nesting location and breeding status. We collected very high frequency (VHF) radio-telemetry data in southern British Columbia from Clayoquot Sound (190 birds; 2000-2002) and Desolation Sound (206 birds; 1998-2001). The sites differ strongly in their oceanic exposure and surrounding terrestrial features. Kernel utilization distribution-based estimates showed that breeders and non-breeders had similar overall distributions, but breeders were more spatially aggregated. Pooled home ranges of non-breeders were larger than those of breeders, but the distributions of individual home range sizes did not differ significantly by breeding status. However, compared with non-breeders, breeding murrelets were more likely to share their home range with other breeders. Home range sizes were larger and commuting distances were longer at Desolation Sound than at Clayoquot Sound; the average home range size for individuals was 241 ± 6.7 km2 at Clayoquot Sound and 330 ± 8.8 km2 at Desolation Sound. Individuals that nested closer together were more likely to share their marine home range in Desolation Sound, but not at Clayoquot Sound. Commuting distance to a nest site was not related to home range size at either site. Our results support the hypothesis that, at a local scale, breeding murrelets congregate at specific foraging areas and are not strongly constrained by commuting distance to nesting locations. Our results also support the concept that home range size may be indicative of the overall habitat quality of an area. We quantify connectivity between terrestrial and marine habitats and highlight important historical foraging locations.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMovebankFrench-language works237,207