Tests of absolute photorefractoriness in four species of cardueline finch that differ in reproductive schedule
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Species with different reproductive schedules may differ in how they respond to the annual change in photoperiod (the adaptive specialization hypothesis). Seasonally breeding species are predicted to use photorefractoriness to terminate reproduction prior to inclement conditions in autumn and winter, whereas opportunistically breeding species may not exhibit photorefractoriness. We tested for absolute photorefractoriness in four species of cardueline finch that differ in their reproductive schedules: opportunistically breeding red crossbills, flexibly breeding pine siskins, and seasonally breeding Cassin's finches and gray-crowned rosy-finches. Field observations indicated that all four species regress their gonads and begin prebasic feather molt in late summer or autumn. However, exposure to a long day photoperiod in autumn (24 h:0 h L:D) resulted in elevation of gonadotropins and testicular recrudescence in all species except Cassin's finches. Thus, by this criterion, some of the seasonally breeding species tested here did not exhibit absolute photorefractoriness. These results indicate that phylogenetic history needs to be taken into account when considering the adaptive nature of photoperiod response systems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".