Effects of early rearing experience on adult behavior and nesting in captive Hawaiian crows (<i>Corvus hawaiiensis</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Behavioral data were collected during the breeding season on eight pairs of Hawaiian crows (Corvus hawaiiensis) housed at two facilities on different islands. All data were collected from videocamera time‐lapse recordings of the nesting platforms. Behaviors included frequency of nest cup manipulation, percent of time spent on nest, allopreening, play, and stereotypy. The number of breeding pairs increased from four in 1996 to six in 1997, to seven in 1998, and to eight in 1999. Five of the older birds (three males and two females) were solitary‐reared for most if not all of their first year, while the remaining 12 birds were all socially reared. Significant differences were found between isolate‐ and socially‐reared birds, with isolate‐reared birds having higher rates of solo play (P = 0.0041) and stereotypies (P = 0.0090). Pairs that were comprised of at least one isolate‐reared bird engaged in significantly less allopreening (P = <0.0001) than pairs in which both birds were socially reared. From 1996 to 1999, 87 eggs were laid, with a mean of 1.88 ± 0.24 SEM eggs per clutch. Only three females produced clutches every year, and they were responsible for 85.1% of the eggs laid. Although not significant, the mean number of clutches produced per pair decreased from 2.50 ± 0.65 in 1996 to 0.87 ± 0.99 in 1999. Age of females does not appear to be a critical factor in the decrease in clutch production. New pairing combinations are under way in an effort to improve propagation in this highly endangered species. Zoo Biol 21:59–75, 2002. © 2002 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
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 | 0.000 | 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".