FOOD SUPPLY AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF EGG SIZE IN THE THICK-BILLED MURRE1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the effect of egg size on post-hatching development in the Thick-billed Murre (Uria lomvia), an Arctic seabird that lays a one-egg clutch, at a colony where food availability during chick-rearing was low (Digges Island, Nunavut, Canada). We compared our results to those of a previous study conducted at a colony where food availability was higher (Coats Island, Nunavut). To control for underlying phenotypic correlations between egg size and parental quality, we switched eggs at random among pairs. Egg size positively affected the rate of early wing-feather growth, but contrary to prediction, the advantage enjoyed by chicks from large eggs over those from small eggs at Digges Island (1.6 days' feather growth on average) was no greater than at Coats Island (2.0 days). Egg size had no effect on the rate at which chicks gained mass at Digges Island, but young from large eggs tended to remain heavier than those from small eggs. At Coats Island, this occurred only in a year in which chicks grew relatively slowly, offering some support for the hypothesis that a large egg confers greater advantage when feeding conditions are unfavorable. Adults at Digges Island invested heavily in provisioning their chicks, but there was no evidence of a trade-off between egg size and provisioning. As costs associated with large eggs have not been detected in Thick-billed Murres, the existence of considerable variation in egg size, beyond that associated with female age or experience, remains unexplained.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".