Bibliographic record
Abstract
Timing of breeding in terrestrial birds has been progressed with the global warming trend during recent decades. This paper reviewed the inter-annual trends of the timing of breeding in seabirds and potential mechanisms driving these changes. Their timing of breeding was progressed in 3 of 4 cases in the Arctic at the rates of 0.3-1.5 d/year, but it was delayed in 6 of 10 cases in the Antarctic at slower rates (<0.1 d/year). In cooltemperate areas, timing of seabird’s breeding tended to delay in western Atlantic, progressed in Canadian Pacific, but no significant trends were observed in California coast and Japan. Factors explaining these trends varied among regions and included the sea-ice extent, SST, air temperature and strength of upwelling and primary production. These shifts of the timing of breeding in seabirds sometimes caused their mismatch with the seasonal prey availability, hence their decreased reproduction. This review indicates that the studies of local marine ecosystem are essential to understand the effects of global warming on seabird phenology and population change.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".