MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Breeding dispersal of Northern Flickers<i>Colaptes auratus</i>in relation to natural nest predation and experimentally increased perception of predation risk

2006· article· en· W2138452869 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan J. Fisher, Karen L. Wiebe

Bibliographic record

VenueIbis · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredationNest (protein structural motif)Biological dispersalPredatorBiologyEcologyNest boxReproductive successZoologyDemographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After nest predation, breeding dispersal can be an effective strategy to avoid local nest predators. Furthermore, encounters with predators at a nest during the pre‐laying stage may be used by parents to judge future risk, such that they may abandon a nest when a nest predator has been encountered. We studied whether the between‐ and within‐year breeding dispersal of Northern Flickers Colaptes auratus was dependent upon the outcome of the previous nesting attempt. We also tested whether pairs presented with a model predator prior to egg‐laying were more likely to abandon their nests than were pairs presented with a control model. Between years, males moved significantly further after having their nest depredated than did successful males, and females showed the same trend. However, these movements did not result in greater reproductive success. More pairs switched sites within years after having their nest depredated, but those that remained and those that moved had equal subsequent nest success. Stressful encounters with predators involving nest defence may trigger dispersal both between and within years, although reproductive benefits are unclear. The proportion of pairs abandoning nests did not differ between parents presented with control or predator models, suggesting that a single encounter with a predator is not a sufficient deterrent against continued use of a particular nest.

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)0.000
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations47
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIbisSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207