Spatiotemporal Patterns of Decline of the Loggerhead Shrike in Virginia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Loggerhead Shrikes (Ianius 1udovicianus) have declined for decades and are a threatened species in Virginia.To understand when and where shrike population losses have occurred in Virginia, we analyzed Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) data for Loggerhead Shrikes from 1966Shrikes from -2013 (n =29 routes) (n =29 routes).The highest number of shrikes was reported by BBS in the central region (n=7 routes with 71 shrikes), south central region (n =4 routes with 90 shrikes) and southeast region (n =2 routes with 41 shrikes), accountingfor 77% oftotal shrikes reported.Beginning in the late-1970 's Loggerhead Shrikes began disappearing/rom BBS routes where their numbers had been highest.Losses of shrikes swept from east to west, with the last BBS reported shrike in the western region of Virginia in 2012.We compared BBS results to other sources of data on shrike distribution: the first Virginia Breeding Bird Atlas (VABBA) (1985)(1986)(1987)(1988)(1989), Christmas Bird Count (CBC), bird banding records, and shrike sightings reported in Virginia Birds.The CBC shows exponential decline of Loggerhead Shrikes, with Virginia losing approximately half its wintering shrikes every 10 years.We discuss possible causes for the decline of Loggerhead Shrikes and present recommendations for shrike conservation.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".