Dawn singing of Eastern Phoebes varies with breeding stage and brood number
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dawn chorus is a daily period of continuous singing by male songbirds that begins prior to sunrise. It is relatively less studied than daytime singing, and particularly in suboscine birds. We analyzed dawn singing of 14 Eastern Phoebes (Sayornis phoebe) in Echo Bay, Ontario over the 2011–2012 breeding seasons. We measured time of first song, length of dawn bout, time of final song, average song rate, and peak song rate and compared these characteristics among breeding stages. Results indicated that breeding stage was a significant predictor of all five dawn song features. Our results suggest that dawn singing of Eastern Phoebes is directly related to female fertility. We show that males begin singing significantly earlier when females are fertile. Males sang significantly longer during fertile and incubation stages than while feeding young. Males began singing later and sang for the shortest duration during the pre-breeding period. Song rates were higher in first broods than in second broods. We showed that suboscine dawn signaling patterns vary across breeding seasons in ways similar to oscine songbirds.
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".