MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7015450267

Status of Sandhill Cranes (Grus canadensis) in the Yorkton Wetland Complex, Saskatchewan, Canada

2001· dissertation· en· W7015450267 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMinds at UW (University of Wisconsin) · 2001
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlockGrus (genus)PopulationHabitatBiological dispersalSandhill
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was conducted during 1995-1997 to determine the population size and
\nnumber of breeding sandhill cranes in the Yorkton Wetland Complex (YWC) in
\nsoutheastern, Saskatchewan, Canada. Breeding pairs were monitored during the spring
\nand summer to characterize the habitat surrounding nest sites and determine nesting
\nsuccess. Non-breeding flocks were monitored to determine habitat use, roost site
\ncharacteristics, and movements. The study also assessed the tolerance and attitudes of
\nlocal landowners toward a proposed whooping crane reintroduction. The suitability of
\nthe YWC as a potential whooping crane reintroduction site was assessed using the
\nbiological criteria developed by the Whooping Crane Recovery Team.
\nData on nesting was collected for 7 breeding pairs during the study. Nesting
\nbegan in late April and ended in early June. All nests occurred in hardstem bulrush
\n(Scripus acutus) stands in the emergent deep marsh zone of open water marshes. Seven
\neggs were measured in 4 nests. Total nesting productivity for the 3 years was 0.75
\nfledged chick per pair (16 pairs fledged 12 offspring). Productivity was affected by
\ndisturbance, mate change, adult mortality, and predation. Hunting mortality may be a
\nfactor limiting population growth.
\nNon-breeding flocks occurred on the YWC in all years. A flock numbering up to
\n80 individuals was present west of Rokcby Marsh from June to late August 1996.
\nAverage dispersal distance from the open water roost was 0.8 km. The flock consistently
\nused a field of grand peas (Pisum sativum) as a secondary roost. From April to June
\n1997, a flock of 130 birds was present on Rokeby Marsh. The flock fed on swathed
\ncereal grains and small groups were observed dry land roosting overnight.
\nEight of eleven landowners surveyed were supportive of a whooping crane
\nreintroduction in the region. Landowner attitudes towards the presence of sandhill crane
\non private landholdings appeared to be shaped largely by concerns about crop
\ndepredation.
\nThe YWC was dropped from consideration as a potential whooping crane
\nreintroduction site largely due to the criteria that the existing migratory flock and the
\nreintroduced population should be maintained as separate and distinct entities. As
\nwhooping cranes occasionally stop within the YWC during migration, the potential for
\ncontact between the 2 populations existed, and the Whooping Crane Recovery Team
\nwithdrew the region from further consideration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0050.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMinds at UW (University of Wisconsin)Same topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207