MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090833861 · doi:10.1890/13-1277.1

To breed or not: a novel approach to estimate breeding propensity and potential trade‐offs in an Arctic‐nesting species

2014· article· en· W2090833861 on OpenAlexafffund
Guillaume Souchay, Gilles Gauthier, Roger Pradel

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsCenter for Northern StudiesUniversité Laval
FundersArctic Goose Joint VentureParks Canada
KeywordsBreedSeasonal breederPropensity score matchingReproductionReproductive successNesting (process)BiologyTraitDemographyStatisticsEcologyMathematicsPopulationComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breeding propensity, i.e., the probability that a mature female attempts to breed in a given year, is a critical demographic parameter in long‐lived species. Life‐history theory predicts that this trait should be affected by reproductive trade‐offs so that the probability of future reproduction should depend on the current reproductive investment. However, breeding propensity is one of the most difficult parameters to estimate because nonbreeders are often absent from the breeding area, thereby requiring the inclusion of unobservable states in the analysis. We developed a new methodological approach by integrating a robust design sampling scheme within the multi‐event capture–recapture framework. Our new model accounted for uncertainty in state assignation while allowing for departure of individuals between secondary sampling occasions. We applied this model to a long‐term data set of female Greater Snow Geese ( Chen caerulescens atlantica ) to estimate breeding propensity and to investigate potential reproductive costs. We combined resightings during the nesting stage and recapture at the end of the breeding season to estimate breeding propensity and nesting success, and added recoveries to improve survival probability estimates. We found that both breeding propensity and nesting success depended upon breeding status in the previous year, though not survival. Successful breeders had a lower breeding propensity than failed breeders in the following year, but a higher nesting success. Individuals absent from the breeding colony had a low breeding propensity, but a high nesting success the following year. Our results suggest a cost of reproduction on breeding propensity in the next year, but once females decide to breed, nesting success is likely driven by individual quality. An added benefit of our model is that, unlike previous models with unobservable states, all parameters were identifiable when survival and breeding probabilities were fully state dependent. Our new multi‐event framework is a flexible tool that can be applied to a large range of species to estimate breeding propensity and to investigate reproductive trade‐offs.

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)0.000
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations55
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcologySame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207