MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017273318 · doi:10.1525/cond.2008.110.1.110

BODY TEMPERATURE AND ACTIVITY PATTERNS OF FREE-LIVING LAUGHING KOOKABURRAS: THE LARGEST KINGFISHER IS HETEROTHERMIC

2008· article· en· W2017273318 on OpenAlexaff
Christine E. Cooper, Gerhard Körtner, Mark Brigham, Fritz Geiser

Bibliographic record

VenueOrnithological Applications · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNocturnalThermoregulationCaptivityBiologyMetabolic rateZoologyEcologyAnimal scienceRange (aeronautics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We show that free-ranging Laughing Kookaburras (Dacelo novaeguineae), the largest kingfishers, are heterothermic. Their minimum recorded body temperature (Tb) was 28.6°C, and the maximum daily Tb range was 9.1°C, which makes kookaburras only the second coraciiform species and the only member of the Alcedinidae known to be heterothermic. The amplitude of nocturnal body temperature variation for wild, free-living kookaburras during winter was substantially greater than the mean of 2.6°C measured previously for captive kookaburras. Calculated metabolic savings from nocturnal heterothermia were up to 5.6 ± 0.9 kJ per night. There was little effect of ambient temperature on any of the calculated Tb-dependent variables for the kookaburras, although ambient temperature did influence the time that activity commenced for these diurnal birds. Kookaburras used endogenous metabolic heat production to rewarm from low Tb, rather than relying on passive rewarming. Rewarming rates (0.05 ± 0.01°C min−1) were consistent with those of other avian species. Captivity can have major effects on thermoregulation for birds, and therefore the importance of field studies of wild, free-living individuals is paramount for understanding the biology of avian temperature regulation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrnithological ApplicationsSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207