Feather corticosterone reveals stress associated with dietary changes in a breeding seabird
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Changes in climate and anthropogenic pressures might affect the composition and abundance of forage fish in the world's oceans. The junk-food hypothesis posits that dietary shifts that affect the quality (e.g., energy content) of food available to marine predators may impact their physiological state and consequently affect their fitness. Previously, we experimentally validated that deposition of the adrenocortical hormone, corticosterone, in feathers is a sensitive measure of nutritional stress in seabirds. Here, we use this method to examine how changes in diet composition and prey quality affect the nutritional status of free-living rhinoceros auklets (Cerorhinca monocerata). Our study sites included the following: Teuri Is. Japan, Middleton Is. central Gulf of Alaska, and St. Lazaria Is. Southeast Alaska. In 2012 and 2013, we collected "bill loads" delivered by parents to feed their chicks (n = 758) to document dietary changes. We deployed time-depth-temperature recorders on breeding adults (n = 47) to evaluate whether changes in prey coincided with changes in foraging behavior. We measured concentrations of corticosterone in fledgling (n = 71) and adult breeders' (n = 82) feathers to determine how birds were affected by foraging conditions. We found that seasonal changes in diet composition occurred on each colony, adults dove deeper and engaged in longer foraging bouts when capturing larger prey and that chicks had higher concentrations of corticosterone in their feathers when adults brought back smaller and/or lower energy prey. Corticosterone levels in feathers of fledglings (grown during the breeding season) and those in feathers of adult breeders (grown during the postbreeding season) were positively correlated, indicating possible carryover effects. These results suggest that seabirds might experience increased levels of nutritional stress associated with moderate dietary changes and that physiological responses to changes in prey composition should be considered when evaluating the effect of prey quality on marine predators.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".