FLOCKING AND FORAGING BEHAVIOR OF WINTERING PROTHONOTARY WARBLERS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We quantified flocking behavior and examined the impact of social context (solitary, single-species flocks, and mixed-species flocks) on the foraging behavior of Prothonotary Warblers (Protonotaria citrea) wintering in a Costa Rican mangrove forest and surrounding habitats. Based on observations collected over two winters during 70 visits to four sites, 87% (483) of the 555 Prothonotary Warblers encountered moved in flocks and over 48% (271) of these individuals were in single-species flocks. Although the propensity to join flocks was 6% higher for Prothonotary Warblers in the second winter of the study, neither the average size of single-species flocks nor the average number of individuals or species in mixed-species flocks differed between years. Twenty-seven different species were identified in mixed-species flocks that had at least one Prothonotary Warbler, but Nearctic migrants dominated these flocks. Analyses of focal observations on 57 females and 93 males indicated that Prothonotary Warbler foraging behavior was largely independent of flock type and size. Foraging maneuver, substrate, and location did not differ significantly for individuals of either sex foraging alone, in single-species, or mixed-species flocks. The species is almost strictly insectivorous, gleaning made up 70% of 150 prey capture attempts observed and about half of all attempts (76 of 150) were directed towards leaf surfaces. Foraging generally occurred in the outer third of the tree, on branches less than 1 cm in diameter, in the bottom half of the canopy. Agonistic interactions among flock members that involved Prothonotary Warblers were uncommon and neither flock type nor size were useful predictors for rates of foraging, movement, preening, or vigilance.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".