POPULATION STATUS AND GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OF GREATER SANDHILL\nCRANES IN THE MID-CONTINENT POPULATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Number and geographic distribution of greater sandhill cranes (Grus canadensis tabida) in the mid-continent population (MCP) of sandhill cranes were evaluated. G. c. tabida comprised 7 of 133 (5.3%) individuals of 3 subspecies which projects to 31,579 ± 11,661 (SE) individuals in an estimated spring MCP of 600,000 cranes. From a platform transmitting terminal (PTT)-marked sample representative of the geographic distribution of G. c. tabida, 10 of 13 (77%) settled during the breeding season in east-central Canada/Minnesota, including 4 in northwestern Minnesota, 4 in Manitoba (2 at sites near the Minnesota border), and 2 in Ontario. Three (23%) cranes settled in west-central Canada (1 in Saskatchewan and 2 in Alberta). From a sample of 16 VHF-radioed G. c. tabida representative of MCP distribution during 2003-2006, 11 (69%) and 5 (31%) originated from breeding grounds in east-central Canada and west-central Canada, respectively. Eight of 13 (62%) PTTmarked G. c. tabida settled in transition areas between the temperate prairies, and the mixed woods shield and the boreal plain ecological regions during the breeding season. Breeding distributions of PTT-marked G. c. tabida overlapped with G. c. rowani extensively in east-central Canada and Minnesota. All PTT-marked G. c. tabida that settled on breeding grounds in Canada staged in areas open to sport hunting in Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and North Dakota during fall; mean arrival and departure dates from staging areas were 7 September and 19 October (n = 12), for an average stay of 40 ± 4 (SE) days. G. c. tabida that spent the breeding season in Minnesota stayed in Minnesota during fall and experienced less exposure to hunting seasons over the fall/winter period than cranes breeding in Canada (26%, n = 3, vs. 55%, n = 8). A reduction in G. c. tabida harvest likely would be required for sandhill cranes to move beyond their current status as an occasional breeder across most of the northern plains, including the Prairie Pothole Region.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".