A tangerine-scented social odour in a monogamous seabird
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social odours, conspecific chemical signals, have been demonstrated in every class of vertebrate except birds. The apparent absence is surprising, as every bird examined has a functional olfactory system and many produce odours. The crested auklet (Aethia cristatella), a monogamous seabird, exhibits a distinctive tangerine-like scent closely associated with courtship. Using T-maze experiments, we tested whether auklets preferred conspecific odours and whether they distinguished between different types of scent, two prerequisites of chemical communication. Crested auklets exhibited: (i) an attraction to conspecific feather odour; (ii) a preference for two chemical components of feather scent (cis-4-decenal and octanal), which we identified as seasonally elevated; and (iii) differential responses to odours, as indicated by a preference for auklet odour, an aversion to mammalian musk, but no significant response to banana essence (amyl acetate). Our results suggest that crested auklets detect plumage odour and preferentially orientate towards this stimulus. The striking and well-described courtship display that involves the scented neck region, the 'ruff sniff', provides a conspicuous behavioural mechanism for odour transmission and the potential for scent assessment during sexual selection. Although the importance and full social function of chemical signals are just beginning to be understood in birds, including crested auklets, social odours promise to reveal a largely unexplored and possibly widespread means of avian communication.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".