MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1968131853 · doi:10.1139/z00-015

Functions of perch relocations in a communal night roost of wintering bald eagles

2000· article· en· W1968131853 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amy A. Yackel Adams, Susan K. Skagen, Richard L. Knight

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerchForagingRelocationEveningMicroclimateDominance (genetics)FisheryEcologyBald eagleBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>Geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the functions of perch relocations within a communal night roost of wintering bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) along the Nooksack River, Washington, during two winters. We tested seven predictions of two nonexclusive hypotheses: (1) bald eagles relocate within roosts to assess foraging success of conspecifics and (2) bald eagles relocate to obtain thermoregulatory benefits from an improved microclimate. Additionally, we gathered descriptive information to allow refinement of further alternative hypotheses. We rejected the hypothesis that relocations are a means of assessing foraging success. Contrary to our expectations, immature eagles did not relocate to be closer to adults, and relocations were less frequent when food was less abundant. Our data support the hypothesis that eagles relocate within night roosts to obtain a favorable microclimate during winters when they are subjected to cold stress and food stress. In both winters, relocations were more frequent in the evening than in the morning. In both winters, most evening relocations were to the center of the roost rather than to its edge, and the frequency of relocation to the center was greater when temperatures were low. The microclimate hypothesis, however, explains only a limited number of relocations. Based on our findings, it is likely that relocation has multiple functions, including establishing and (or) maintaining foraging associations, establishing and (or) maintaining social-dominance hierarchies when food is less abundant, and nonsocial activities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations11
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction→French-language works237,207→