MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056450005 · doi:10.1525/auk.2009.09055

Extreme Levels of Multiple Mating Characterize the Mating System of the Saltmarsh Sparrow (<i>Ammodramus caudacutus</i>)

2010· article· en· W2056450005 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher E. Hill, Carina Gjerdrum, Chris S. Elphick

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Auk · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersConnecticut Sea Grant, University of ConnecticutNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceCoastal Carolina University
KeywordsMatingBiologyNest (protein structural motif)SparrowZoologyMating systemPopulationSalt marshEcologyPaternal careDemographyGeneticsOffspringPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We studied mating patterns in Saltmarsh Sparrows (Ammodramus caudacutus), a species with no territorial defense, no paternal care, and no pair bonds. Fifty-seven of 60 broods with at least 2 sampled chicks (and all broods that were completely sampled) resulted from multiple mating by females. About one-third of the broods had a different father for each chick, but the most common pattern, found in 36 of 60 nests, was multiple sires, with at least 1 male having sired 2 or more chicks. The level of multiple paternity in Saltmarsh Sparrows may be the highest documented in any bird. Levels of multiple mating increased with population density but not with nesting synchrony. We were able to assign paternity to particular males for about half the 206 chicks that were genotyped. Males sired chicks as far as 1.4 km from their original capture site, and some males sired chicks in multiple nests, separated by up to 0.5 km. We also document a case of 2 females laying eggs in the same nest.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.274

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations31
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe AukSame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207