MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Time constraints in temperate‐breeding species: influence of growing season length on reproductive strategies

2010· article· en· W2137527966 on OpenAlexafffund
Kirsty E. B. Gurney, Robert G. Clark, Stuart M. Slattery, N. V. Smith-Downey, J. Walker, Llwellyn M. Armstrong, S. E. Stephens, Michael J. Petrula, Robin M. Corcoran, Kate H. Martin, Kathryn A. DeGroot, Rodney W. Brook, Alan D. Afton, Kyle A. Cutting, J. M. Warren, Michael A. Fournier, David N. Koons

Bibliographic record

VenueEcography · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Geological Survey
KeywordsTemperate climateSeasonal breederEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Organisms that reproduce in temperate regions have limited time to produce offspring successfully, and this constraint is expected to be more pronounced in areas with short growing seasons. Information concerning how reproductive ecology of endotherms might be influenced by growing season length (GSL) is rare, and species that breed over a broad geographic range provide an opportunity to study the effects of time constraints on reproductive strategies. We analyzed data from a temperate‐breeding bird, the lesser scaup Aythya affinis ; hereafter scaup, collected at eight sites across a broad gradient of GSL to evaluate three hypotheses related to reproductive compensation in response to varying time constraints. Clutch initiation date in scaup was unaffected by GSL and was unrelated to latitude; spring thaw dates had a marginal impact on timing of breeding. Clutch size declined during the nesting season, as is reported frequently in bird species, but was also unaffected by GSL. Scaup do not appear to compensate for shorter growing seasons by more rapidly reducing clutch size. This study demonstrates that this species is remarkably consistent in terms of timing of breeding and clutch size, regardless of growing season characteristics. Such inflexibility could make this species particularly sensitive to environmental changes that affect resource availabilities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcographySame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207