Age-dependent costs of cowbird parasitism in Yellow Warblers (<i>Setophaga petechia</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brood parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds (Molothrus ater (Boddaert, 1783)) often reduces the reproductive success of their hosts. We examined whether the ability of females to avoid or mitigate the costs of brood parasitism improved with age in a population of Yellow Warblers (Setophaga petechia (L., 1766)) breeding near Revelstoke, British Columbia, between 2004 and 2011. Cowbirds parasitized 18% of Yellow Warbler nesting attempts and females rejected 24% of parasitized nests, principally by deserting the nest and initiating a new breeding attempt. We found no evidence that older females were better at avoiding parasitism or more likely to reject parasitized nests than yearlings. On average, brood parasitism reduced clutch sizes by 0.8 eggs, had no effect on nest success, but reduced the number of young fledged from successful nests by 1.3 offspring. Despite age-related improvement in some measures of breeding performance, the costs of brood parasitism at each period of the breeding cycle did not vary with age. There was, however, some evidence, that brood parasitism reduced the annual productivity (total number of young fledged) of older females less than the annual productivity of yearlings suggesting that the cumulative costs of brood parasitism varied with age.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".