Brood Patches of American Kestrels Altered by Experimental Exposure to PCBs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Captive breeding (n = 25 pairs) and nonbreeding (n = 25) American kestrels were exposed to a mixture of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) (Aroclor 1248:1254:1260) through their diet of day-old cockerels. Kestrels ingested approximately 7 mg/kg body weight each day of PCBs, and this dosage resulted in environmentally relevant total PCB residues in eggs (geometric mean of 34.1 microg/g). An equal number of unexposed birds served as controls. Bare areas of skin known as brood patches function during incubation to warm eggs; therefore, brood patch size could potentially influence hatching success, or patches may be a confounding factor in the relationship between poor incubation behavior and hatching failure observed in birds in toxicological studies. Exposure to PCBs altered the size of brood patches in American kestrels. PCB-exposed male and female nonbreeders had two of three brood patches that were larger than those of control nonbreeders. Breeding males exposed to PCBs had smaller patches than controls, whereas PCB-exposed female kestrels had one larger and one smaller patch than controls. Patch sizes were not related to total PCB residue levels in eggs of exposed birds. Brood patches were not related to various incubation behaviors or hatching success in either control or PCB-exposed kestrels.
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".