Changes in the foraging dive behaviour and energetics of king penguins through summer and autumn: a month by month analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
King penguins Aptenodytes patagonicus are known to change their diving behaviour in response to changes in both prey location and their breeding status through the early stages of the breeding cycle (austral summer and autumn). However, little information exists on whether and how these changes affect the energy expenditure of such behaviour. By deploying heart rate and hydrostatic pressure data loggers, we investigated detailed changes in the dive time budgeting of king penguins during foraging dives across the breeding season, in the same individuals, and the associated changes in estimated oxygen consumption during those dives. Maximum dive depth, duration, bottom duration, feeding events (indicated by wiggles) per dive and post-dive duration increased through the study period. While a foraging dive later in the breeding season was energetically more costly than a dive earlier in the season, the overall rate of energy expenditure did not change, nor did energy cost per unit prey capture. These findings indicate an ability of king penguins to adjust their foraging dive behaviours through the summer and autumn without affecting the energetic costs of diving to capture prey. Such plasticity may be necessary to compensate for changes both in prey location and abundance, and in the energy requirements of the chick over time.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".