Seasonal, meteorological, and microhabitat effects on breeding success and offspring phenotype in the barn swallow,<i>Hirundo rustica</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
:Breeding performance and offspring quality can be affected by temporal and spatial variation in ecological conditions. We analyzed the concomitant effects of timing of breeding, ambient temperature at different stages of the breeding cycle, and microhabitat conditions (presence or absence of livestock farming) on breeding success, morphology, and immunity of the offspring in an aerially insectivorous passerine bird, the barn swallow (Hirundo rustica). A seasonal decline in breeding success was observed, while maximum offspring phenotypic values of different characters were attained at different times in the breeding season, depending on presence or absence of livestock farming. In addition, environmental temperature at different stages of the breeding cycle (pre-incubation, incubation, and nestling stage) of individual pairs affected all the components of nestling phenotypic quality. The results of this correlational study suggest that parents are faced with complex decisions about optimal timing of breeding and microhabitat choice. In addition, different ecological factors seem to interact in influencing breeding success and offspring quality in the barn swallow. Natural and anthropogenic changes in ecological conditions, including ambient temperature and distribution of livestock, may therefore affect distribution and productivity of a population of a declining passerine species.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".