The Long and the Short of It: No Dietary Specialisation between Male and Female Western Sandpipers Despite Strong Bill Size Dimorphism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many bird species show spatial or habitat segregation of the sexes during the non-breeding season. One potential ecological explanation is that differences in bill morphology favour foraging niche specialisation and segregation. Western sandpipers Calidris mauri have pronounced bill size dimorphism, with female bills averaging 15% longer than those of males. The sexes differ in foraging behaviour and exhibit partial latitudinal segregation during the non-breeding season, with males predominant in the north and females in the south. Niche specialisation at a local scale might account for this broad geographic pattern, and we investigated whether longer-billed females and shorter-billed males occupy different foraging niches at 16 sites across the non-breeding range. We used stable-nitrogen (δ(15)N) isotope analysis of whole blood to test for dietary specialisation according to bill length and sex. Stable-nitrogen isotope ratios increase with trophic level. We predicted that δ(15)N values would increase with bill length and would be higher for females, which use a greater proportion of foraging behaviour that targets higher-trophic level prey. We used stable-carbon (δ(13)C) isotope analysis to test for habitat segregation according to bill length and sex. Stable-carbon isotope ratios vary between marine- and freshwater-influenced habitats. We predicted that δ(13)C values would differ between males and females if the sexes segregate between habitat types. Using a model selection approach, we found little support for a relationship between δ(15)N and either bill length or sex. There was some indication, however, that more marine δ(13)C values occur with shorter bill lengths. Our findings provide little evidence that male and female western sandpipers exhibit dietary specialisation as a function of their bill size, but indicate that the sexes may segregate in different habitats according to bill length at some non-breeding sites. Potential ecological factors underlying habitat segregation between sexes include differences in preferred habitat type and predation risk.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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 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".