MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7112182124

Natures Chorus: Determining Avian Richness across Microhabitats using AudioMoths

2024· other· en· W7112182124 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSUNY Digital Repository Support (State University of New York System) · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpecies richnessWaterfowlWetlandHabitatCitizen scienceCommon speciesIdentification (biology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bird surveys are commonly actively performed using point count techniques; however, more recently, passive acoustics have become a complementary method to evaluate species richness and trends across microhabitats. Traditional methods like point counts may lead to biases in data records depending on the researcher's experience level. Autonomous recording devices (ARU), such as AudioMoths, are an affordable method for those studying avifauna to add to their toolbox. Confidence in rare species identification may increase by being able to leave AudioMoths out for a longer duration than feasible with traditional point counts and the ease with which artificial intelligence program workflows can attempt species confirmation. In the fall of 2024, we performed both passive (ARU) and active (point count) avifauna surveys across three microhabitats (e.g., wetland, forest, meadow) at Point au Roche State Park. Our active surveying method used binoculars and Merlin Bird ID to help identify species for three-10-minute intervals during each visit. Our passive surveying method used AudioMoths to record vocalizations deployed for seven days, recording during peak hours from 20:00-8:00. BirdNet-Analyzer was used to identify vocalizations from audio files. Species richness was greatest in the meadow (51) and wetland (47) and least in the forest (27). Merlin Bird ID recorded black-capped chickadee (Poecile atricapillus), Canada goose (Branta canadensis), northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata), and downy woodpeckers (Picoides pubescens) across the sites. The American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos) and barred owl (Strix varia) called abundantly at the wetland (43%) and the meadow (36%) sites, while the forest site was more limited. Avian community similarity was greatest between the wetland and meadow (64%) microhabitats. Other notable species observed are stripe-faced meadow katydid (Orchelimum concinnum), wood frog (Lithobates sylvaticus), and spring peeper (Pseudacris crucifer). We highlight the importance of conducting active and passive surveying across multiple habitats to more adequately capture rare species that might be difficult to capture with shorter survey durations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.003

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.224 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSUNY Digital Repository Support (State University of New York System)French-language works237,207