MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2321568775 · doi:10.1242/jeb.077735

COOL SONGS ARE SEXY FOR LINCOLN'S SPARROW CHICKS

2013· article· en· W2321568775 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Viviana Cadena

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineAgricultural and Biological Sciences
ThématiqueAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésChorusSparrowSingingBasal metabolic rateArtHistoryZoologyBiologyLiteratureAcousticsPhysics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Most people will agree that a nicely performed song by a guy hoping to impress a girl will go a long way. This is particularly true in the world of birds, where singing is one of the main ways males try to seduce females. Interestingly, many songbirds focus their serenading efforts at dawn, which is usually the coldest time of day. But why would they want to do this? Singing at dawn represents a thermal challenge: metabolic rate increases in the cold and therefore the task of singing becomes more energetically costly. But perhaps that is exactly why they do it, to impress females with their cold tolerance and dazzling performance. If so, then female birds would find songs sung in the cold sexier than songs sung in warm weather. To test this hypothesis, Michaël Beaulieu and Keith W. Sockman from the University of North Carolina, USA, studied the songs of Lincoln's sparrows at different temperatures.Lincoln's sparrows are common throughout Canada and parts of the USA. The average temperature during their song chorus is 7.8°C, well below the temperature (23°C) beneath which metabolic rates rise above basal levels. To determine whether female Lincoln's sparrows are more attracted to songs performed at cold temperatures than songs performed in warm conditions, Beaulieu and Sockman divided females into two groups, and played them songs performed by two males. First, they exposed one group of females to one male's songs at 16°C and played the second male's songs at 1°C, recording how long the females spent next to the loudspeaker. However, they had to be sure that the females weren't simply hanging out by the speaker because they preferred that male's recital, so they reversed the temperatures when they played the songs to the second group of females, playing the first set at 1°C and the second set at 16°C. The researchers also tested whether the females would remember if a particular song had been sung in the cold and if they preferred it over a song that they had heard at warmer temperatures.Having analysed the females' preferences, the team found that the female sparrows spent 40% more time close to the speaker when they were serenaded in the cold than when they were listening to love songs in mild conditions. Furthermore, even at 16°C, females preferred the song they had initially heard in the cold, so songs performed in the cold are clearly sexier than songs that are warbled when it's warm.For songbirds, singing in the cold seems to be a way of advertising the quality of a male in the form of cold tolerance. The preferred choice of females for males singing at low temperatures might represent their choice of a male that may be energetically fitter and may be able to endure energetic challenges better than soft males who sing in the warm. The fact that females remembered which songs were performed in the cold might allow females to remain in the roost or perform other activities or while listening and then reciprocate the male's advances later in the day – when timing and temperature may be more convenient. Unfortunately, females' preferences for males with the stamina to serenade on chilly mornings may be severely affected by climate change as morning temperatures rise, although one thing is clear: cool singing is hot for birds.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,004
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,015

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,030
Tête enseignante GPT0,281
Écart entre enseignants0,251 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2013
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Experimental Biology→Même sujetAnimal Behavior and Reproduction→Travaux en français237 207→