Inconsistent geographic variation in the calls and duets of Barred Owls (<i>Strix varia</i>) across an area of genetic introgression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Much of our understanding of vocal geographic variation in birds is based on the dialects of oscine songbirds that learn their songs. Recent studies have revealed that nonoscine vocal behavior is more complex than previously thought, yet we still have a rudimentary understanding of how vocalizations of suboscine and nonpasserine birds are influenced by genetic and geographic variation. We examined geographic variation in male calls, female calls, and duets of Barred Owls (Strix varia) among 10 locations across the southeastern United States. Recent molecular work revealed two genetically distinct clades of Barred Owl at either end of our transect, with substantial introgression in between. We predicted that calls would vary with genetic distance in a clinal pattern, but that duets and duetting behavior might exhibit dialects similar to that of learned bird song. Discriminant analysis did not reveal any components of vocalizations or vocal behavior that could be used to assign vocalizations to the correct recording location. There were no relationships between any aspect of vocal structure or behavior and geographic distance. Some characteristics of male and female calls and duets varied among locations, but there was no discernible geographic pattern. We suggest that such inconsistent geographic variation in vocalizations is not unexpected for non-song-learning species. The lack of geographic pattern in vocalizations may be due, in part, to high levels of individual variation, recent signal evolution, and local adaptations. We discuss the application of these results to the ontogeny and evolution of complex, coordinated vocal behavior in nonpasserines.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".