MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6983643492

A MULTI-SCALE ANALYSIS OF NORTHERN GOSHAWK HABITAT IN ONTARIO

2006· article· en· W6983643492 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHabitatNest (protein structural motif)OccupancyPredationNesting (process)Scale (ratio)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The northern goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) has been identified as a potential indicator of sustainable forest management by a number of state and provincial jurisdictions across North America, including Ontario. However, little is known about northern goshawk habitat use in Ontario. This thesis examined northern goshawk habitat using a multi-scale approach. Within the study, goshawk habitat was examined from the nest-tree scale through to the multiple home ranges, and even at the provincial scale. Examination of the micro-scale nesting habitat use revealed that goshawks in central Ontario preferred to nest in a hardwood tree (specifically aspen), and more importantly in trees that were significantly larger than those in the immediate vicinity. Goshawks also selected certain forest-types and avoided others. The nesting areas were characterized as well-stocked with larger (sawlog) trees and fewer small (polewood) trees, a high canopy closure, and a low shrub and ground cover. Goshawk occupancy rates did not differ for those locations with partial timber harvesting and those without. I further examined habitat use at the landscape scale. The composition and configuration of habitat in this portion of the study was examined at 7 spatial scales and multiple forest habitat classifications (including habitat defined for 3 prey species and for northern goshawks). The cumulative effect of parti al-timber harvesting only started to have a negative influence on goshawk nest occupancy at the 50-ha spatial scale, and was most influential at the 170-ha scale. Examining these multiple scales helped identify a potential threshold for goshawk occupancy of harvesting not evident at the micro-scale. I evaluated two untested goshawk habitat suitability models (HSMs) for their ability to predict known goshawk nest locations. Revisions were as analyzed and new goshawk HSM for central Ontario was iii proposed. Goshawk habitat use in Southern Ontario was also examined because the fragmented nature of this forest region compared the relatively contiguous forest cover of central Ontario examined previously in this study. Nest locations in southern Ontario still generally required continuously closed forest of 12 to 24 ha for nesting areas. However, at the broader-scale, home-range scaled buffer areas seemed to only require 20 to 30% of the area be closed forest coverage. The southern Ontario results also supported a finding from landscape analysis in central Ontario, that goshawks can tolerate a fragmented habitat, with various mean patch sizes and number of patches at the home-range scale.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)→Same topicAvian ecology and behavior→French-language works237,207→