Effects of twice-over rotation grazing on the relative abundances of grassland birds in the mixed-grass prairie region of southwestern Manitoba
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mixed-grass prairie region of southwestern Manitoba is a hotspot for many endangered grassland birds. This region has been degraded to less than a quarter of its historical amount of mixed-grass prairie. Remaining prairie is primarily used for livestock grazing. The objective of this study was to evaluate the contribution of sustainable land management practices, such as rotational grazing, in the conservation of this region. In 2008 and 2009, I compared the abundances of grassland birds on two grazing regimes, twice-over rotation and season-long, to ungrazed fields. Bird surveys were done during the breeding season and were conducted using 100-m fixed-radius point-count plots. I determined the effects of treatment, landscape and vegetation characteristics on songbird abundances using generalized linear mixed models. Grassland birds selected grazed pastures over ungrazed fields in both years, and species richness of obligate grassland birds was significantly greater (α = 0.10) on season-long than twice-over pastures (β = 0.419, p = 0.032, in 2008 and β = 0.502, p = 0.043 in 2009). Season-long grazing may actually benefit grassland bird communities by creating somewhat temporally stable areas of high use and low use within the pasture. However, nesting success studies and long-term monitoring are necessary to further understand how twice-over rotation grazing systems contribute to the conservation of grassland birds in southwestern Manitoba.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".