Effects of parental quality and egg size on growth and survival of herring gull chicks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We performed a clutch-transfer experiment with herring gulls (Larus argentatus) to quantify how parental attributes and egg size affect chick growth and survival. The quality of parents was assessed by their average egg mass. There was no association between hatching success and egg mass in either unmanipulated or experimental nests. Among experimental treatments, the high-quality parents had a significantly higher chick survival rate than low-quality parents in 1991 and when data from 1990 and 1991 were pooled. A positive effect of egg size on chick survival was apparent only when data from both years were pooled. Chicks raised by high-quality parents had higher structural growth rates (tarsus) than chicks raised by low-quality parents. We discount the likelihood for selection of larger eggs because egg size has trade-offs with other life-history traits that have a strong influence on fitness. Despite the correlation between parental quality and chick survival, we doubt that there is character displacement for greater parental quality. Parental quality is probably affected by nutrition and is expected to have low heritability.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".