Physiological effects of immune challenge in captive greenfinches (<i>Carduelis chloris</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is expected that the costs of exploiting an organism's immune system form the basis of many life-history trade-offs. However, the processes responsible for generating these costs have rarely been quantified in terms of energy expenditures and physiological rearrangements in the organism during the immune response. To determine the physiological changes caused by the immune response, we recorded various condition indices of male captive greenfinches (Carduelis chloris) 1, 4, and 8 days after immune challenge with a nonpathological antigen (sheep red blood cells; SRBC). Measured variables included estimates of total and differential leukocyte counts, serum protein concentrations and profile, serum triglyceride concentration, basal metabolic rate, body mass, spontaneous locomotory activity, and serum total antioxidant capacity. On days 4 and 8 post injection, immune-challenged greenfinches significantly reduced their spontaneous locomotory activity, which suggests a switch to energy conservation. Fourteen hours after injection of SRBC, a transient increase in serum beta-globulin concentration was recorded, indicating an acute-phase response to the antigen. None of the other condition indices was affected by the treatment, which suggests that when birds maintained on an affluent feeding regimen in captivity mounted an immune response against SRBC, they did not incur any serious physiological impact.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".