Evidence for sexual partitioning of foraging mode in Western Sandpipers (<i>Calidris mauri</i>) during migration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Migrating Western Sandpipers, Calidris mauri (Cabanis, 1857), observed feeding at an intertidal stopover site on the Fraser River delta, British Columbia, shifted their foraging mode from surface-pecking to probing over a 3-week period in April and May. We tested possible mechanisms to account for the field observations. Using control and shorebird exclusion plots over a 3-month period bracketing the migration, we determined that neither seasonal nor shorebird-induced changes in the relative availability of epifaunal compared with infaunal prey accounted for the decline in the prevalence of epifaunal feeding behaviour. However, strong peaks in both epi- and in-faunal prey densities coincided with the migration period, suggesting that migratory timing may be linked with the productivity schedule of major stopover sites. Males, which precede females in the migration and have relatively shorter bills, were observed to engage in epifaunal feeding more frequently than females. Thus, while foraging behaviour of the Western Sandpiper at a population level appears "plastic", the feeding repertoire of individuals is more specialized and results in sexual partitioning of prey resources. The implications of our findings for differential distribution patterns over the nonbreeding range and sex-related differences in contaminant profiles are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 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".