Foraging segregation between two closely related shearwaters breeding in sympatry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trophic segregation has been proposed as a major mechanism explaining the coexistence of closely related animal taxa. However, how such segregation varies throughout the annual cycle is poorly understood. Here, we examined the feeding ecology of the two subspecies of Cory's shearwater, Calonectris diomedea diomedea and Calonectris diomedea borealis, breeding in sympatry in a Mediterranean colony. To study trophic segregation at different stages, we combined the analysis of isotope values (delta(15)N, delta(13)C) in blood obtained during incubation and in feathers moulted during chick-rearing and wintering periods with satellite-tracking data during the chick-rearing period. Satellite-tracking and stable isotope data of the first primary feather revealed that C. d. borealis foraged mainly in the Atlantic whereas C. d. diomedea foraged exclusively in the Mediterranean. This spatial segregation could reflect the foraging behaviour of the C. d. borealis individuals before they arrived at the Mediterranean colony. Alternatively, greater wing loading of C. d. borealis individuals may confer the ability to fly across the strong winds occurring at the at the Gibraltar strait. Isotope values of the eighth secondary feather also support segregation in wintering areas between the two forms: C. d. diomedea wintered mainly in association with the Canary current, whereas C. d. borealis wintered in the South African coast. Overall, our results show that spatial segregation in foraging areas can display substantial variation throughout the annual cycle and is probably a major mechanism facilitating coexistence between closely related taxa.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".