MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Habitat Quality, Social Dominance and Dawn Chorus Song Output in Black‐Capped Chickadees

2006· article· en· W2028194365 on OpenAlexafffund
Harry van Oort, Ken A. Otter, Kevin T. Fort, Carmen I. Holschuh

Bibliographic record

VenueEthology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsHabitatDominance (genetics)EcologyBiologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Individuals that settle in poor habitats may reduce resource investments in various life history traits; for example, resources may be withheld from costly advertisement signals. There may be geographic variation in advertisement levels that correspond with habitat quality; however, this is poorly documented and it is unclear whether such habitat effects have consequences for the function of mate‐choice signals within habitats. We examined song output of male black‐capped chickadees ( Poecile atricapillus ) during the dawn chorus in two contrasting habitats (mature forest vs. young forest) known to differ in quality. Dominance rank is indicative of phenotypic quality in this species and was assessed during the preceding winter. We measured the song output of males participating in the dawn chorus during the nesting/egg laying period. Males living in young forest had reduced song output; however, a habitat–rank interaction term showed that dominant birds accounted for most of this difference. This suggests that signal reliability might be lost in poor habitats. We generate several hypotheses to explain these findings.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score0.430

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.310 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations32
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthologySame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207