Alula size signals male condition and predicts reproductive performance in an Arctic‐breeding passerine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While studies of achromatic plumage signaling are scarce relative to chromatic ornaments, achromatic ornaments have the potential to act as an efficient form of visual communication due to the highly conspicuous contrast between black and white body regions. Recently, achromatic plumage reflectance has been shown to indicate condition, yet the condition‐dependence of achromatic patch size remains unstudied. Here we show the first evidence that alula size, an achromatic plumage patch, has the potential to signal a male’s condition and predict reproductive performance. In Arctic‐breeding snow buntings Plectrophenax nivalis , the size of the alula simultaneously predicted pre‐breeding physiological health and the number of offspring produced, through an intermediate variable (lay date). Snow buntings appear to pair assortatively; males and females arriving earlier pair together, and changes in body condition over the breeding season are positively related within pairs. We suggest that simple achromatic plumage patches, like alula size, have the potential to act as condition‐dependent signals. Consequently, females may benefit from assessing these signals to reliably evaluate a male’s condition and reproductive potential as a means of maximizing their reproductive success.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".