MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A long‐term study of reproductive performance in tree swallows: the influence of age and senescence on output

2001· article· en· W2073989656 on OpenAlexaffabout
Raleigh J. Robertson, Wallace B. Rendell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Ecology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFledgeBiologyAvian clutch sizeNest (protein structural motif)HatchlingReproductive valueBroodNest boxPopulationReproductive successReproductionHatchingDemographyZoologyEcologyOffspringSeasonal breederPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary We describe age‐related reproductive performance and recapture rates of tree swallows ( Tachycineta bicolor Vieillot) based on a 25‐year study of a nestbox population in south‐eastern Ontario, Canada (1975–99). Performance improved from first‐time breeders to intermediate‐aged birds. Nest initiation advanced, and clutch size increased in both sexes. In females the number of hatchlings and fledglings increased, and the proportion of nests failing completely declined. Performance declined in females after ‘middle‐age’, in the number of young fledged, and the proportion of young fledged relative to initial clutch and brood size. Also, the proportion of nests that failed completely increased in the oldest birds. Males showed similar patterns. An index of performance incorporating clutch size, hatching and fledging efficiency, and two measures of total nest failure increased to, then declined after, 4 years of age in females and 3 years in males. The relationship between this index and age was best predicted by quadratic regression. We found no support for three of four hypotheses to explain improvement in performance with age. Recapture rates declined after age 4Y in males, but remained unchanged in females until age 7Y +, while output decreased in both sexes (Residual Reproductive Value). Birds breeding repeatedly did not perform better during their first attempt compared to birds that bred only once (Selection). Birds with varied breeding experience did not differ in their performance within age‐groups (Breeding Experience). We did find support for the Breeding Age hypothesis; in females with no breeding experience, there was a successive advance in laying and increase in clutch size from 2 to 4 years of age. Improved performance may be due to skills acquired with age, such as those devoted to feeding and balancing energy demands, which are necessary to prepare and maintain individual condition prior to, and during, breeding. Senescence in performance after ‘middle‐age’ may result from accumulated costs of previous breeding effort which have been identified in this species based on research elsewhere.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 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

Citations137
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal EcologySame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207