Effects of oil development on habitat quality and its perception by mixed-grass prairie songbirds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oil development has altered mixed-grass prairies in south-eastern Alberta, potentially impacting habitat quality and suitability for grassland birds. I tested whether three passerines can accurately assess habitat quality in the presence of this anthropogenic disturbance. I monitored nesting success and stress hormones and tested for differences in settlement patterns at sites impacted by real oil infrastructure, simulated noise, and control sites. Corticosterone levels suggested that habitat quality was reduced in some cases by disturbance. I also found disturbance impacted perceived habitat quality; however, perceived and realized quality were not always affected similarly. Both Chestnut-collared Longspurs and Savannah Sparrows exhibited stress near infrastructure, but higher-quality Longspur females nested near infrastructure while Savannah Sparrows avoided it. This mismatch may help explain why species suffer disproportionately in response to disturbances. Managers should reduce human presence by concentrating above-ground infrastructure using directional drilling, decommissioning old well heads, reclaiming roads, and reducing traffic.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".