Nonbreeding Eastern Curlews <i>Numenius madagascariensis</i> Do Not Increase the Rate of Intake or Digestive Efficiency before Long‐Distance Migration because of an Apparent Digestive Constraint
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The possibility of premigratory modulation in gastric digestive performance was investigated in a long-distance migrant, the eastern curlew (Numenius madagascariensis), in eastern Australia. The rate of intake in the curlews was limited by the rate of digestion but not by food availability. It was hypothesized that before migration, eastern curlews would meet the increased energy demand by increasing energy consumption. It was predicted that (1) an increase in the rate of intake and the corresponding rate of gastric throughput would occur or (2) the gastric digestive efficiency would increase between the mid-nonbreeding and premigratory periods. Neither crude intake rate (the rate of intake calculated including inactive pauses; 0.22 g DM [grams dry mass] or 3.09 kJ min(-1)) nor the rate of gastric throughput (0.15 g DM or 2.85 kJ min(-1)) changed over time. Gastric digestive efficiency did not improve between the periods (91%) nor did the estimated overall energy assimilation efficiency (63% and 58%, respectively). It was concluded that the crustacean-dominated diet of the birds is processed at its highest rate and efficiency throughout a season. It appears that without a qualitative shift in diet, no increase in intake rate is possible. Accepting these findings at their face value poses the question of how and over what time period the eastern curlews store the nutrients necessary for the ensuing long, northward nonstop flight.
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) | 0.002 | 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".