Reproductive, immune, and physiological end points in tree swallows on reclaimed oil sands mine sites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Wild nestling tree swallows (Tachycineta bicolor) inhabiting reclaimed wetlands receiving tailings or water from mine tailings ponds on oil sands mine sites were the subjects in a multiyear study to determine the ecological viability of these areas. Spanning two field seasons, immune function, reproductive performance (clutch size and mass, hatching success), nestling growth and survival, and diet of tree swallows were examined on six wetlands. One aspect of immune function, the T-lymphocyte proliferative response, was assessed in vivo using a phytohemagglutinin skin test. Hepatic ethoxyresorufin-O -deethylase (EROD) activityprovided a biomarker of exposure to oil sands contaminants in the tree swallow nestlings. Results show that there were no differences among reclaimed wetland sites for tree swallow reproductive success, nestling growth rate, and immune response that could be attributed to tailings or tailings pond water additions. Increased EROD activity confirmed the presence of xenobiotics in the diets of nestlings from two sites, while the main reference site was relatively free of EROD-inducing compounds. Dietary analyses showed that 84% of the food items of the tree swallow nestlings were of aquatic origin, likely from the local wetlands, and thus would be expected to provide a good reflection of biological effects of any mining-related contaminants accumulating through the food chain.
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".