Roost Selection and Roosting Behavior of Male Common Nighthawks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many studies to date have documented clear energetic costs and benefits of avian roost selection. Male Common Nighthawks (Chordeiles minor) spend at least half of each day during the summer on a day-roost. Therefore selection of roost-sites likely has implications for survival and long-term fitness. Our objective was to identify characteristics of day-roosts used by male Common Nighthawks in Cypress Hills Provincial Park, Saskatchewan, Canada. We measured features of roost trees and monitored behavior of roosting birds. Nighthawks preferred trees situated on north facing slopes surrounded by trees with significantly lower canopy height compared to randomly measured trees. Roost trees were taller than random trees and occurred in less dense patches of forest. Birds always roosted parallel to branches and adopted a motionless posture. There was a non-significant trend for birds to roost on branches facing east. Birds typically roosted in a direction pointing away from the sun and away from the roost tree trunk. Roost trees emerging from the canopy may provide landmarks for birds as they search for suitable day-roosts, whereas a low tree density surrounding roost trees likely reduces flight costs associated with maneuvering. Our results suggest that roosts chosen by male nighthawks may provide selective benefits in terms of microclimate, energetics and predator avoidance, but further studies are needed to determine which is the most important.
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) | 0.000 | 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".