MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7010160394

Guano Rain and Growing Pain: Co-Nesting Dynamics of Double-Crested Cormorants and Black-Crowned Night-Herons at Tommy Thompson Park

2025· other· en· W7010160394 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork University
KeywordsCormorantNest (protein structural motif)GuanoPopulationPopulation growthEcosystemHabitatForaging
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the co-nesting dynamics between double-crested cormorants (Nannopterum auritum) and black-crowned night-herons (Nycticorax nycticorax) in Tommy Thompson Park, Toronto, Canada, from 1992 to 2023. Linear mixed models with Bayesian inference were used to examine the impacts of cormorant abundance, nest density, management practices, and environmental factors on night-heron population growth. The strongest and only statistically significant relationship was a positive association between cormorant and night-heron growth indices. Results showed substantial uncertainty in the effects of most variables on night-heron growth indices, with wide credible intervals for nest densities, night-heron road proximity, and management activities. Nest densities of both species and proximity to roads had minimal effects on night-heron colony growth, with posterior means near zero. Management activities showed a slight positive but non-significant effect on night-herons. The study revealed that while cormorant population growth generally benefited night-herons, there was high uncertainty in parameter estimates, potentially due to small sample sizes and ecosystem complexity.

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 score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score0.868

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.166 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYork University Digital Library (York University)→French-language works237,207→