The trade-off of reproduction and survival in slow-breeding seabirds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A trade-off between reproduction and survival is one of the most consistent empirical aspects of life-history diversification. One explanation for this interspecific pattern is evolved differences in the balance of allocation to reproduction versus individual maintenance and survival. The same pattern is expected, however, simply as a result of differences among species in body size. We tested these alternatives using original data from 44 species of albatrosses and petrels, long-lived seabirds that breed very slowly. After application of regression techniques to remove the effects of body size and phylogeny, annual reproduction and survival exhibited a significant trade-off. Our measures of reproductive effort also exhibited significant trade-offs with age at maturity, the latter strongly associated with survival. Feeding rate of chicks, success at fledging chicks, and annual chick production were also significantly associated. In conclusion, after removing the effects of body size, we found a significant trade-off of reproduction and survival, in spite of the fact that these long-lived birds lay only one egg at a time. Our examination of the pattern among life-history traits of these slow breeders and their pelagic feeding ecology provide support for the evolutionary explanation of a trade-off of reproduction and survival.
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 | 0.001 | 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".