MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033771715 · doi:10.1139/z99-182

Timing of breeding in subarctic passerines in relation to food availability

2000· article· en· W2033771715 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tapio Eeva, Simo Veistola, Esa Lehikoinen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTurun YliopistosäätiöEmil Aaltosen Säätiö
KeywordsFicedulaBiologyParusEcologyPasserineAvian clutch sizeSubarctic climateOverwinteringSeasonal breederAbundance (ecology)Nest (protein structural motif)ZoologyDeciduousBreedBroodReproduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We studied timing of breeding in four species of hole-nesting passerines, the Siberian tit (Poecile cinctus), great tit (Parus major), pied flycatcher (Ficedula hypoleuca), and redstart (Phoenicurus phoenicurus), and the abundance of the arthropods in their diet (ground-dwelling spiders, winged insects, foliage-feeding lepidopteran and hymenopteran larvae) in Finnish Lapland for 6-12 years. Densities of the invertebrate groups varied considerably, both seasonally and annually. All the bird species started to breed in early summer, when weather conditions were often poor. At the beginning of the breeding season all species relied on ground-dwelling spiders, whose abundances peaked early and were less variable over the years than those of insects. Abundances and timing of emergence of caterpillars in birch and pine canopies (the major food sources for foliage-gleaners) were highly variable, but each year their abundances peaked in July or August, after the nestling period of the birds. This contrasts with reported cases in deciduous forests at midlatitudes and shows that at our site the birds did not time their nestling period ultimately to coincide with peak food availability. Mean clutch sizes declined seasonally in the tit species and the pied flycatcher but not in the redstart. The number of fledglings did not depend on laying date, except in the Siberian tit, for which dependence of fledgling number on laying date varied among years. Although early broods were not more productive (i.e., greater number of fledglings) than later ones, early breeding is ultimately a necessity for recruitment because of the short subarctic summer. Birds cannot delay breeding in the north because late breeding would shorten the time available for moulting, food-hoarding, and preparation for migration or wintering. Our results show that at the time of egg laying, passerines may receive proximate cues to allow them to predict food conditions during the nestling period. Still, exact prediction of food availability during later phases of nesting is constrained by an inherent discrepancy between warm-blooded birds and poikilothermic invertebrates: once a bird has started egg laying, the subsequent phases follow nearly automatically on certain calendar dates, whereas the development of the arthropods depends on the rate of temperature increase.

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 score0.474
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

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)0.0060.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations80
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207