MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1573811908 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v117i2.683

Patterns of Nestling Feeding in Harris's Sparrows, <em>Zonotrichia querula</em> and White-crowned Sparrows, <em>Z. leucophrys</em>, in the Northwest Territories, Canada

2003· article· en· W1573811908 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Christopher J. Norment

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPaternal careSympatric speciationZoologyEcologyEmberizidaeHabitatPregnancyOffspring

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patterns of nestling feeding by males and females were compared in sympatric populations of Harris’s Sparrows (Zonotrichia querula) and Gambel’s White-crowned Sparrows (Z. leucophrys gambelii) in the Northwest Territories, Canada. In both species, only the female brooded young. Total feeding rate (both parents), and male and female feeding rates, increased with nestling age in both species; total feeding rates did not differ significantly between species. Nestlings of both species were fed most frequently by females during the early part of the nestling period (day 0-5), and feeding rates did not approach parity until nestlings were 6-8 d old. Patterns of nestling feeding, including initially low male provisioning, in Harris’s Sparrows and White-crowned Sparrows at my low arctic study site were similar to those in other populations of Zonotrichia. Low levels of male nestling care, relative to females, appears to be relatively uncommon among socially monogamous passerines. Reduced male care may be adaptive in temperate environments, as it would allow males to pursue other mating opportunities. However, reasons for persistence of the trait in the low arctic, where breeding is highly synchronous, remain unclear.

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)0.001
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 categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.196 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207