Clutch size relative to tree cavity size in Northern Flickers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We analysed clutch size versus nest size in 153 broods of the Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus , a woodpecker using natural cavities in British Columbia, Canada. Larger volume cavities were less susceptible to predation and cavity size was positively associated with the age and body size of males and with the body condition of female parents. Although clutches varied between 4 and 11 eggs, and the floor area of cavities varied about 5‐fold, we found no relationship between clutch size and floor area or cavity volume. To see if there were fitness consequences to clutch size relative to nest size, we examined hatching success and nestling mortality in flicker broods. Hatching success was not related to cavity size, but crowding slightly reduced nestling survival even when clutch size was controlled statistically. However, there was no effect of cavity size on the total number of nestlings fledged. Newly excavated flicker cavities were smaller than reused cavities suggesting a cost to excavation. This cost, coupled with the minimal fitness consequences of overcrowding, may explain why flickers do not adjust clutch size to cavity size.
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 | 0.001 | 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".