Phenotypic Flexibility of Body Composition in Relation to Migratory State, Age, and Sex in the Western Sandpiper (<i>Calidris mauri</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the flexibility of body composition in relation to seasonally variable demands for endurance flight capacity and hyperphagia in a migratory shorebird. Migrating western sandpipers were sampled in spring and fall while refueling at a north temperate stopover and were compared with nonmigrating birds captured at a tropical wintering area in Panama. Sandpipers weighed 25% more at stopover, and nearly 40% of migratory mass increase consisted of lean body components. Most organs and flight muscles were 10%–100% larger during migration, and the greatest relative size increases occurred in the digestive system (including liver). Birds preparing to initiate spring migration from Panama deposited only fat, suggesting that changes in lean body components take place after migration has begun, possibly through training effects. Sex did not influence body composition. Juveniles making their first southward migration were similar to adults in structural size and body mass but had substantially enlarged alimentary tracts. Sandpipers appeared to deposit lean mass during stopover in fall but not in spring. The dramatic enlargement of the digestive system in this small species that makes short flights and fuels frequently contrasts with the reduction of digestive components in larger species that fuel only once or twice by making one or two very long flights to their destination.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".