Carotenoid-Based Ornaments of Female and Male American Goldfinches (<i>Spinus tristis</i>) Show Sex-Specific Correlations with Immune Function and Metabolic Rate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conspicuous ornamentation has been linked to immunological and physiological condition in males of many species. In species where both sexes are ornamented, it is unclear whether the signal content of ornaments differs between males and females. We examined the immunological and physiological correlates of carotenoid-based bill and plumage ornamentation in American goldfinches Spinus tristis, a species in which bright orange bills are sexually monomorphic but yellow plumage is sexually dimorphic during the breeding season. Because bill color is dynamic over short periods while plumage color is static over longer time frames, we tested whether these signals have the potential to provide temporal information about immunity and condition. In both sexes, bill color (but not plumage color) was negatively related to leukocyte differential, a measure of recent stress, while plumage color (but not bill color) was positively related to resting metabolic rate. In females, bill color also positively correlated with immunoglobulin Y, a component of acquired immunity, while plumage color positively predicted natural antibody levels, a component of innate immunity. In males, neither bill color nor plumage color predicted immune function, suggesting that the mechanisms underlying these signals vary with sex. Our results demonstrate that dynamic signals such as bill coloration do not merely reflect the same information provided by static signals but that these two classes of signal provide information about different temporal aspects of phenotypic quality. Furthermore, our results indicate that a signal expressed in both sexes has the potential to provide different information depending on the sex of the bearer.
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".