Predicting the future summer range of a declining Arctic waterfowl: the Greenland White-fronted Goose (Anser albifrons flavirostris)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates what the future might hold for an endemic goose species, found exclusively in the low Arctic region of West Greenland. Facing a decline since four decades, the Greenland White-fronted Goose constitutes one of few goose populations showing a declining trend. Warmer temperatures on the breeding grounds and improved winter survival seem to benefit most populations of geese. Here, a species distribution model is applied to predict how the environmental conditions of low Arctic Greenland might change in the future. A ‘business as usual’ scenario, projected with two different climate models, indeed showed improved future conditions within the summer range of the Greenland White-fronted Goose. Snow cover, followed by temperature, was found to be the most important environmental factor shaping the distribution. Furthermore, novel potential breeding grounds were located on the southeast coast of Greenland, opposite the current summer range. This area is discussed in terms of becoming a future refuge for this vulnerable population, away from the newly established Greater Canada Goose in West Greenland. Interactions between the two species seem to have increasingly negative effects on the breeding success of Greenland White-fronted Goose. Whether the novel breeding grounds will eventually become colonized or not remains highly uncertain. However, other goose populations have shown such range shifts to be possible.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".