Relationships of cadmium, mercury, and selenium with nutrient reserves of female lesser scaup (<i>Aythya affinis</i>) during winter and spring migration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trace elements may have important effects on body condition of ducks during spring migration, because individuals are experiencing energetically costly events (e.g., migration, nutrient reserve accumulation, pair formation, feather molt, and ovarian follicle development). We examined relationships among hepatic cadmium, mercury, and selenium concentrations (microg/g dry wt) and nutrient reserves (lipid, protein, and mineral) of female lesser scaup (Aythya affinis) during winter and spring migration at four locations within the Mississippi Flyway (LA, IL, and MN, USA, and MB, Canada). Selenium concentrations (range, 3.73-52.29 microg/g dry wt) were positively correlated with lipid reserves (F1,73 = 22.69, p < 0.001, type III partial r2 = 0.24), whereas cadmium was negatively correlated with lipid reserves (F1,73 = 6.92, p = 0.010, type III partial r2 = 0.09). The observed relationship between cadmium and lipid reserves may be cause for concern, because lipid reserves of females declined by 55 g (47%), on average, within the range of observed cadmium concentrations (0.23-7.24 microg/g dry wt), despite the relatively low cadmium concentrations detected. Mean cadmium concentrations were higher in Minnesota (1.23 microg/g dry wt) and Manitoba (1.11 microg/g dry wt) than in Louisiana (0.80 microg/g dry wt) and Illinois (0.69 microg/g dry wt). However, mean cadmium concentrations predict lipid reserves of females to be only 11 g lower, on average, in Minnesota than in Illinois. Previous research documented that lipid reserves were 100 g lower in Minnesota than in Illinois; consequently, cadmium is unlikely to be the sole cause for decreases in lipid reserves of females during late-spring 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".