MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7153692091

Reproductive Success of Peregrine Falcons and Other Raptors at Wager Bay and Melville Peninsula Northwest Territories

2024· article· W7153692091 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
George W. Calef, Douglas C. Heard

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida) · 2024
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeninsulaBayReproductive successPopulationWildlife conservation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Wager Bay area in northeastern Keewatin was surveyed for nests of raptorial birds during late July and August in 1976 and 1977, and the southwestern part of Melville Peninsula was also surveyed in August 1977.These surveys established Wager Bay and Melville Peninsula as the most productive nesting areas known for the endangered Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus tundrius).More Peregrine Falcon sites producing young were located at Wager Bay than are known to exist in any other area of the North American Arctic.The production of young Peregrine Falcons at Wager Bay in 1976 and 1977 exceeded that of any area surveyed during the 1975 North American Peregrine Falcon Survey.In 1976 we located 14 nest sites occupied by Peregrine Falcons, 5 sites occupied by Gyrfalcons (Falco rusticolus), i1 sites occupied by Roughlegged Hawks (Buteo lagopus), and 1 nest site of a Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos).In 1977, 27 Peregrine Falcon sites, 5 Gyrfalcon sites, 2 Rough-legged Hawk sites, and 1 eagle site were located.In 1977, Peregrine Falcons reoccupied at least 54%, and possibly as many as 91%, of the nesting territories occupied in 1976.Of the 13 peregrine sites visited in 1976, 85% produced young; young/ occupied site averaged 2.08, and young/successful nest averaged 2.45.In 1977, 84% of the 22 visited sites produced young; young/occupied site averaged 2.21, and young/successful nest averaged 2.95.The Peregrine Falcon sites did not differ significantly between years in percent successful sites, young/occupied site, or young/successful nest.There was no correlation between the number of young Peregrine Falcons produced at nest sites in 1976 and the number produced at the same sites in 1977.The nests that had been visited in 1976 produced 2.16 young/successful nest in 1977, as compared with 3.3 young/successful nest among the nests not previously visited.This difference was significant.Fifteen occupied Peregrine Falcon sites were located on Melville Peninsula, at least 10 of which produced young.The average number of young/successful nest was 2.6.The Peregrine Falcon populations at Wager Bay and Melville Peninsula did not differ significantly in either number of young/successful nest or in mean distance between occupied sites.Both the Wager Bay and the Melville Peninsula Peregrine Falcon populations are considered to be undepleted populations.A total of 30 Peregrine Falcon chicks from 11 nests were banded at Wager Bay and 6 chicks from 3 nests on Melville Peninsula.One of the banded birds was later captured on North Padre Island, Texas.

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)0.001
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 score0.780
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.176 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueDigital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida)→Same topicAvian ecology and behavior→French-language works237,207→