Dominance-related foraging in female domesticated canaries under laboratory conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many experiments have tested the foraging behaviours of birds relative to their social status. However, results are still not completely clear about the relationship between foraging behaviour and social status in birds. Some studies have shown that dominants use subordinates as food finders, while others show the opposite. Whether dominants search by themselves or wait to exploit the findings of a subordinate is still an unanswered question. For testing these alternative hypotheses, we carried out a laboratory experiment that used female common domesticated canaries, Serinus canaria (L., 1758). We used strict female flocks to avoid any bias based on pair bonds. We looked at the foraging behaviours of females relative to their social status using a foraging board. Our results showed that dominant females behaved as their own food finder. They began searching in the first position and had greater re-search behaviours, which allowed them to find seeds more rapidly than subordinates. Our study showed that foraging behaviour of dominants may be independent of the activities of subordinates. Our results also showed that there was no difference between the number of attacks received by dominants and subordinates when they were on the foraging board, which suggests that subordinates accessed the foraging board less frequently to avoid competition with dominants. We also suggest that environmental conditions may be one explanation for the differences observed among the different studies.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".