MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W891150131

Breeding losses of red grouse in Glen Esk (NE Scotland): comparative studies, 30 years on

2002· article· en· W891150131 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kirsty J. Park, Flora Booth, David Newborn, Peter J. Hudson

Bibliographic record

VenueStirling Online Research Repository (University of Stirling) · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDalhousie University
KeywordsPredationHatchingBroodBiologyAvian clutch sizeIncubationPredatorPopulationGrouseEcologyZoologyNest (protein structural motif)ReproductionAnimal scienceHabitatDemography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hatching success, brood survival and predation rates of red grouse chicks were examined at four sites in north-east Scotland over two years (1994--1995). Two of these sites have previously been the focus of a large-scale population study on grouse during the late 1950s enabling a comparison to be made. A total of 85 hens were radio-tracked and their breeding success monitored over the two years. Compared with studies undertaken in the 1950s, mean clutch size had risen from 7.2 to 8.6 eggs. Of the 76 nests monitored, 17 (22.4%) broods were lost either through egg or chick predation or by the adult being taken by a predator during incubation. Stoats appeared to be responsible for the largest amount of egg predation. There was a significant increase in predation levels, although hatching success was not significantly different from the 1950s. Chick mortality was highest within the first ten days, a similar result to that found in the 1950s. Overall, mean brood survival from hatching to 20 days was 55.1%. Possible reasons for larger clutch sizes, and the apparent increase in predation levels, are discussed.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.240
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.102 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStirling Online Research Repository (University of Stirling)Same topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207