Possible Intermediate Ross' Goose and Snow Goose in Manitoba
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Herons catch two fish in one strike.--Whilestudying the feeding ecology and behavior of herons during 150 trips over 4 years to Brigantine National Wildlife Refuge, New Jersey, I occasionally saw individuals catch two fish with one strike.I saw Great Egrets (Casmerodius albus) catch two fish in one strike 26 times, Great Blue Herons (Ardea herodias) 19 times, and Snowy Egrets (Egretta thula) and Louisiana Herons (Hydranassa tricolor) 3 times each.The herons always caught the two fish between the mandibles rather than by impaling, and the two fish were always of approximately equal size.The double catches were rare compared to one-item strikes, making up less than 1% of each species' successful strikes.Occasional individuals had remarkable success at catching two fish, such as one Great Blue Heron that made six double catches of 1-inch fish out of 16 successful strikes, including four 2-prey strikes in succession.The rarity of occurrence and the lack of any observable differences from normal feeding suggest that double catches are basically accidental.Many cases were of birds in large assemblages of herons and other fish-eaters, apparently concentrating on schooling fish or fish in a spawning run, or of solitary individuals feeding where many small fish broke the surface.The birds came up with two fish presumably because there was a second in line with the one at which they aimed.--DavmE.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".