MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7038647699

INDIRECT EFFECTS OF LOW AMPLITUDE ARVICOLINE CYCLES ON DAILY NEST SURVIVAL OF DUNLIN (CALIDRIS ALPINA HUDSONIA) IN A RAPIDLY CHANGING CLIMATE

2022· other· en· W7038647699 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHymenoptera taxonomy and phylogeny
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredationArcticNest (protein structural motif)PopulationSubarctic climateArctic ecologyPopulation cycleTrophic level
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Alternative Prey Hypothesis (APH) states that predators switch to relatively more abundant\nprey when their main prey is scarce. Arctic lemming population cycles may indirectly affect\npredation risk on alternative prey such as shorebird nests as they share predators. I examined the\nindirect effects of arvicoline rodent cycles on Dunlin (Calidris alpina hudsonia) reproduction in\nChurchill, Manitoba. Using 10 years of field data, the study suggests collared lemming\n(Dicrostonyx richardsoni) cycles did not influence Dunlin nest success. Meadow vole (Microtus\npennsylvanicus) cycles had an interactive effect with arctic fox (Vulpes lagopus) and red fox\n(Vulpes vulpes) abundance, indirectly affecting Dunlin nest success. North Atlantic Oscillations\nhad a positive effect on Dunlin nest success. The results suggest that subarctic ecosystems are\nmore complex than the High Arctic with multispecies trophic dynamics that can be used to\npredict the changing landscapes of the Arctic as the boreal forest expands northwards.

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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.161
Teacher spread0.151 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYork University Digital Library (York University)Same topicHymenoptera taxonomy and phylogenyFrench-language works237,207