Interactive effects of environmental stress and inbreeding on reproductive traits in a wild bird population
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Conservation biologists are concerned about the interactive effects of environmental stress and inbreeding because such interactions could affect the dynamics and extinction risk of small and isolated populations, but few studies have tested for these interactions in nature. 2. We used data from the long-term population study of song sparrows Melospiza melodia on Mandarte Island to examine the joint effects of inbreeding and environmental stress on four fitness traits that are known to be affected by the inbreeding level of adult birds: hatching success, laying date, male mating success and fledgling survival. 3. We found that inbreeding depression interacted with environmental stress to reduce hatching success in the nests of inbred females during periods of rain. 4. For laying date, we found equivocal support for an interaction between parental inbreeding and environmental stress. In this case, however, inbred females experienced less inbreeding depression in more stressful, cooler years. 5. For two other traits, we found no evidence that the strength of inbreeding depression varied with environmental stress. First, mated males fathered fewer nests per season if inbred or if the ratio of males to females in the population was high, but inbreeding depression did not depend on sex ratio. Second, fledglings survived poorly during rainy periods and if their father was inbred, but the effects of paternal inbreeding and rain did not interact. 6. Thus, even for a single species, interactions between the inbreeding level and environmental stress may not occur in all traits affected by inbreeding depression, and interactions that do occur will not always act synergistically to further decrease fitness.
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.
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 it