Life history varies with migratory distance in western sandpipers <i>Calidris mauri</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The propensity of migratory waders to remain on the non‐breeding grounds during the arctic breeding season (“oversummer”) in their first biological year of life (“juveniles”) may be latitude, and thus migratory distance dependent. We compared the extent of preparation for northward migration of western sandpipers Calidris mauri spending the non‐breeding season in México and Panamá during 1995–1998. During winter residency and premigratory periods, we measured body mass and scored the extent of dull basic versus bright alternate breeding plumage of captured juveniles and adults (second biological year or older), and obtained additional plumage scores from observations of uniquely colour banded birds. Nearly all western sandpipers in México prepared for northward migration by increasing body mass and moulting into breeding plumage. In Panamá, most adults prepared for migration, but few, if any, juveniles did so. Patterns of body mass and breeding plumage development do not generally support the hypothesis that oversummering by juveniles results directly from less efficient foraging or from resource competition with adults. We suggest instead that costs directly associated with migratory distance per se influence the life history strategies of sandpipers spending the non‐breeding seasons at different latitudes. This latitudinal difference should interact with the well documented sex‐ratio cline in non‐breeding distribution (male western sandpipers predominating in northern parts of the range and females in southern parts). This suggests that females have more conservative life histories, prioritizing first year survivorship, relative to males that instead weight first‐year breeding opportunities.
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".