VARIATION IN SIZE, COMPOSITION, AND QUALITY OF RUDDY DUCK EGGS AND DUCKLINGS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To evaluate why ducklings hatching from large eggs generally survive better than ducklings from small eggs, we quantified egg-size-related variation in composition and quality of eggs and ducklings of wild Ruddy Ducks (Oxyura jamaicensis). Fresh egg mass averaged 74.1 ± 4.3 g (SD), but ranged from 60.5 to 83.8 g. Despite remarkably large egg size relative to adult female body size, and a 1.4-fold difference in mass between the smallest and largest eggs, most egg constituents increased in direct proportion to fresh egg mass, with bigger eggs producing heavier and larger ducklings. However, large ducklings had proportionately larger yolk sac stores than did small ducklings. Thus, large ducklings also had greater total lipid reserves, an advantage that could enable them to survive better than small ducklings during the first few days after hatching. Variación en el Tamaño, Composición y Calidad de los Huevos y Polluelos de Oxyura jamaicensis Resumen. Para evaluar por qué los polluelos que eclosionan de huevos grandes sobreviven mejor que polluelos provenientes de huevos pequeños, cuantificamos la variación en la composición y calidad de huevos y polluelos en relación al tamaño del huevo en Oxyura jamaicensis. La masa fresca de los huevos promedió 74.1 ± 4.3 g (DE), pero varió entre 60.5 y 83.8 g. A pesar del gran tamaño de los huevos en relación al tamaño corporal de la hembra, y de una diferencia de 1.4 veces en la masa entre el huevo más pequeño y él más grande, la mayoría de los componentes del huevo aumentaron en proporción directa con la masa fresca del huevo. Huevos más grandes produjeron polluelos más grandes y pesados. Sin embargo, polluelos grandes presentaron relativamente mayores reservas en el saco vitelino que polluelos pequeños. Por lo tanto, los polluelos grandes también presentaron una mayor reserva total de lípidos, ventaja que podría permitirles sobrevivir mejor que a los polluelos más pequeños durante los primeros días luego de la eclosión.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".