TIME OF DAY AND FLIGHTINESS IN FLOCKS OF SEMIPALMATED SANDPIPERS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Environmental light intensity is known to exert a strong influence on antipredation behavior by influencing prey vulnerability. However, an association between low light levels and increased predation risk is not well established empirically. For species that rely on visual detection of their predators, low light levels can hinder predator detection and thus increase predation risk. We examined the foraging behavior of migrating Semipalmated Sandpipers (Calidris pusilla) on a mudflat in the Bay of Fundy in New Brunswick, Canada as a function of time of day from dawn to dusk. Time of day was used as a surrogate for light intensity, assuming that, on average, light levels would be lower near sunrise and sunset. Sandpipers forage both day and night at low tide, which occurs at different times each day, thus disentangling the effect of light intensity from energy levels. Falcons make surprise attacks on sandpipers by leaving forest cover and flying low over the mudflat, rendering detection difficult against the dark forest background. The propensity for sandpipers to leave a foraging patch by taking flight was higher earlier and later in the day, controlling for temperature and sandpiper density. Pecking success was similar whether a focal sandpiper stayed in the current patch or took flight at the end of a focal observation, suggesting that the choice to leave abruptly was not related directly to food availability. We conclude that increased flightiness likely represents a response by sandpipers to a perception of higher predation risk from falcon attacks at low light levels.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".