An Experimental Study of Social Attraction in Two Species of Storm-Petrel by Acoustic and Olfactory Cues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many birds, notably colonial nesting seabirds, use public information (the visual, auditory, and olfactory presence of breeding conspecifics) when selecting nesting habitat. When colonies are extirpated, social cues that indicate nesting sites' quality are lost. In the Aleutian Islands, Alaska, storm-petrel populations were destroyed by introduced arctic foxes (Alopex lagopus) and have been slow to return after the foxes' eradication. We tested various social-attraction techniques as a method to encourage recolonization of Leach's (Oceanodroma leucorhoa) and Fork-tailed Storm-Petrels (O. furcata) in Ulva Cove at Amatignak, a former fox-farming island. We tested attraction to playback of each species' calls by broadcasting them in various patterns adjacent to a mist net and attraction to their odors with a T-maze design. We combined these two cues to test whether birds were more likely to enter and inhabit artificial burrows depending on playback and odor treatment. Both species of storm-petrel were attracted strongly to playback of conspecific calls and somewhat to playback of heterospecific calls; Fork-tailed Storm-Petrels were attracted to conspecific odor and entered more artificial burrows when we combined odor and playback cues. We discuss the implications of these results, including the development of protocols to encourage restoration of seabird colonies in the Aleutian Islands after eradication of introduced foxes and Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus).
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".