Why are there so many empty lakes? Food limits survival of mallard ducklings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Food is an important factor affecting survival in many bird species, but this relationship has rarely been explored experimentally with respect to reproductive output of precocial birds. In a field experiment we tested the hypothesis that food abundance limits reproductive output in breeding dabbling ducks. Onto 10 oligotrophic lakes in northern Sweden we introduced one wing-clipped female mallard (Anas platyrhynchos L., 1758) and a brood of 10 newly hatched ducklings, and survival was monitored for 24 days. Food was added ad libitum at five of the lakes, but not at the other five. Duckling survival was best modelled to include a treatment effect, with higher survival on lakes with food added, and a negative effect of harsh weather. As expected, duckling survival increased nonlinearly with age. Only one female remained on control lakes after 24 days, whereas four remained on lakes with food added. This is the first experimental demonstration that food may limit survival and reproductive output in breeding precocial birds. We argue that food limitation may be one reason why duckling mortality is high and why many lakes throughout the Holarctic have no breeding dabbling ducks.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".