Brooding behaviour in the cooperatively breeding Bell Miner (<i>Manorina melanophrys</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brooding of nestlings in cooperatively breeding bird species may be disrupted by the attendance of helpers at the nest. We studied the factors that influence brooding in the cooperatively breeding honeyeater, the Bell Miner (Manorina melanophrys), and how nest attendants interacted with the bird brooding at the nest. Only the breeding female brooded nestlings, despite helpers assisting with many other aspects of the care of nestlings. The number of bouts of brooding by the female per hour was dependent upon the age and number of nestlings, ambient air temperature, and the number of Bell Miners visiting the nest. Behaviours performed by the female differed significantly between brooding and non-brooding visits. These findings are consistent with earlier studies of species with simpler biparental care. However, the complexity of meeting the nutritional and thermoregulatory requirements of nestlings in a cooperatively breeding species is demonstrated by changes in the behaviour of nest attendants when females were brooding, and by the different responses of females to different nest attendants. Nest attendants delayed visiting the nest when the female was brooding. However, if an attendant did visit the nest while the female was brooding, she was more likely to stop brooding and allow nestlings to be fed if the attendant was the breeding male, rather than a helper, irrespective of whether or not the attendants were close relatives of the nestlings.
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".