Timing of copulations and the pattern of paternity in relation to laying order in tree swallows <i>Tachycineta bicolor</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well established that extra‐pair young are present to varying degrees in nests of most avian species. However, the timing of extra‐pair copulations during a female's fertile cycle is not well known, nor is how these copulations translate into the distribution of extra‐pair young within the laying sequence. We determined the rates of successful within‐pair copulations where at least one cloacal contact was achieved, and the number of extra‐pair copulations/attempts in 17 pairs of tree swallows Tachycineta bicolor during the mornings encompassing the female's fertile period. We also examined nestling paternity with respect to laying order in eighteen mixed‐paternity tree swallow broods. The rate of successful within‐pair copulations peaked three days prior to a female laying her first egg, and decreased steadily throughout the laying period. We therefore predicted that extra‐pair young would be more likely to hatch out of later‐laid than earlier‐laid eggs within a female's brood. We found no evidence of an increased frequency of extra‐pair young with laying order. Instead, extra‐pair young appear to be randomly distributed within the laying sequence of tree swallows.
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 | 0.001 | 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".