Forest birds select food-rich habitat during migratory stopover
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many species of migrant songbirds require stopover habitat during migration, as places to rest, and gain additional weight prior to proceeding on in migration. For some birds, the amount of time spent at stopover habitat exceeds the amount of time spent in flight during migration. While the amount of time spent at stopover decreases as habitat quality increases, it is unclear what cues migrant birds use to identify high quality habitat. A set of thirty sites north of Lake Ontario were surveyed weekly during April and early May for the presence of both migrant songbirds, and the emergence of arthropods, as a potential food source. Neither distance from Lake Ontario nor size of the forest had a significant influence on number of migrants or arthropod biomass observed at each stopover site. Total arthropod biomass did however have a significant positive influence on the total number of migrants observed over the course of the migration season. The relationship between arthropod biomass and migrant abundance remained from week to week, although the sites of greatest abundance changed. These results suggest that current land use planning rules, which focus primarily on forest size and connectivity may be insufficient for protecting migratory stopover habitat.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.007 |
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".