Parasite infestation and predation in Darwin's small ground finch: contrasting two elevational habitats between islands
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Contrasting ecological conditions may affect the distribution, abundance and impact of parasites and predators throughout the ranges of hosts and prey. Such patterns are evident on the archipelagos of Hawaii and the Galapagos, which vary in their distribution and abundance of avian parasites within and across islands. Previous research has documented higher intensity of parasitic fly larvae ( Philornis downsi ) in nests of Darwin's finches on elevated islands of the Galapagos. Here we examine P. downsi intensity and predation in 71 nests of Darwin's small ground finch ( Geospiza fuliginosa ) on Floreana Island. We found significant differences in parasite intensity, nest predation and clutch size between the lowland (0–100 m) and highland (300–400 m) habitats. Lowland finch nests had few P. downsi parasites (mean of 8 per nest), high nest predation (44% of nests) and large clutch size (3.4). Highland finch nests showed the opposite pattern, with many P. downsi parasites (40 per nest), low nest predation (17%) and small clutch size (2.5). This study suggests that the impacts of an introduced parasite are limited by its niche requirements and resource availability within and across islands. Our findings also imply that the vulnerability of bird populations to introduced parasites and predators is linked with variation in life history strategies across habitats.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it