Sex differences in razorbill (Family: <i>Alcidae</i>) parent–offspring vocal recognition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study we examines how a pattern of parental care may result in a sex bias in vocal recognition. In Razorbills (Alca torda), both sexes provide parental care to their chicks while at the nest, after which the male is the sole caregiver for an additional period at sea. Selection pressure acting on recognition behavior is expected to be strongest during the time when males and chicks are together at sea, and as a result, parent–offspring recognition was predicted to be better developed in the male parent, that is, show a paternal bias. In order to test this hypothesis, vocal playback experiments were conducted on breeding Razorbills at the Gannet Islands, Labrador, 2001. The data provide clear evidence of mutual vocal recognition between the male parent and chick but not between the female parent and chick, supporting the hypothesis that parent–offspring recognition is male biased in this species. In addition to acoustic recognition, such a bias could have important social implications for a variety of behavioral and basic life history traits such as cooperation and sex-biased dispersal.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".