Date and parental quality effects in the seasonal decline in reproductive performance of the Tree Swallow <i>Tachycineta bicolor</i>: interpreting results in light of potential experimental bias
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
In many bird species early breeders have higher reproductive performance than late breeders from the same population. This could be caused by a reduction in environmental factors related to date per se (Date Hypothesis), or because poorer performers nest later (Parent Quality Hypothesis). We manipulated hatch date of Tree Swallows Tachycineta bicolor by switching clutches with different lay dates, generating broods with advanced or delayed timing, and assessed the impact of the experiment on nestling mass. The Date Hypothesis better explained the decline in nestling mass in the first half of the season, while the Parent Quality Hypothesis was supported in the second half. We also found that female mass loss was unintentionally reduced in advanced females and suggest that such impacts of the experiment on parent quality, or correlations between nestlings and their actual parents via heritability or maternal effects, could bias hatch‐date manipulation experiments towards supporting the Date Hypothesis. Differential costs of incubation, either due to naturally low temperatures early in the season, or due to the unintentional manipulation of female incubation costs, appear to have driven support for the Date Hypothesis early in the season.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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