White-throated sparrows calibrate their magnetic compass by polarized light cues during both autumn and spring migration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The interaction and hierarchy of celestial and magnetic compass cues used by migratory songbirds for orientation has long been the topic of an intense debate. We have previously shown that migratory Savannah sparrows, Passerculus sandwichensis, use polarized light cues near the horizon at sunrise and sunset to recalibrate their magnetic compass. Birds exposed to a +/-90 deg. shifted artificial polarization pattern at sunrise or sunset recalibrated their magnetic compass, but only when given full access to celestial cues, including polarized light cues near the horizon. In the current study, we carried out cue conflict experiments with white-throated sparrows, Zonotrichia albicollis, during both spring and autumn migration in a transition zone between the species' breeding and wintering areas on the south shore of Lake Ontario. We show that white-throated sparrows also recalibrate their magnetic compass by polarized light cues at sunrise and sunset. Sunrise exposure to an artificial polarization pattern shifted relative to the natural magnetic field or exposure to a shift of the magnetic field relative to the natural sky both led to recalibration of the magnetic compass, demonstrating that artificial polarizing filters do not create an anomalous, unnatural orientation response. Our results further indicate that there is no evidence for a difference in compass hierarchy between different phases of migration, confirming previous work showing that polarized light cues near the horizon at sunrise and sunset provide the primary calibration reference both in the beginning and at the end of migration.
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".