Natal forest fragment size does not predict fledgling, pre-migration, or apparent annual survival in Wood Thrushes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Determining the drivers and mechanisms for first-year survival of migratory songbirds has been an understudied area in population dynamics due to the difficulty in tracking juveniles once they have dispersed from the natal site. With the advancement in miniaturization of radio-tags (battery life ~400 days) and the development of the Motus Wildlife Tracking System, we tracked 189 Wood Thrush nestlings through independence and to fall migration departure, and their return the following spring. Natal forest fragment size was not a good predictor of survival at any of the main life stages and onset of fall migration was predicted by fledge date but not natal fragment size. The percent forest cover in the landscape (at 2-km scale) had only a weak effect on fledgling survival. Survival probability was lowest for fledglings on their natal territory (70%, or 0.86 weekly survival probability), very high for juveniles as they explored the local landscape prior to fall migration (89%, or 0.99 weekly survival probability) and low during their first migration and wintering season (26%, or 0.95 weekly survival probability). To our knowledge, this is the first study to directly estimate annual apparent juvenile survival in a migratory songbird using year-round radio-tracking. Our study suggests that small forest fragments are important for the conservation for forest songbirds because they can support high survival of juveniles.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.010 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".