Feather isotope analysis discriminates age-classes of Western, Least, and Semipalmated sandpipers when plumage methods are unreliable
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Avian age-class discrimination is typically based on the completeness of the first prebasic molt. In several calidrid sandpiper species, juvenal flight feathers grown on Arctic breeding grounds are retained through the first three migrations. Thereafter, flight feathers are grown annually at temperate migratory stopover sites during the fall or on the subtropical wintering grounds. Standard methods for distinguishing age classes of sandpipers rely on a combination of traits, including body plumage, coloration of protected inner median covert edges, and extent of flight feather wear. We tested the ability of stable hydrogen isotope ratios in flight feathers (δDf) to distinguish young birds in their first winter through second fall from older adults in three calidrid sandpiper species, Western (Calidris mauri), Least (C. minutilla), and Semipalmated (C. pusilla) sandpipers. We compared the apparent reliability of the isotope approach to that of plumage-based aging. The large expected differences in δDf values of flight feathers grown at Arctic versus non-Arctic latitudes enabled use of this technique to discriminate between age-classes. We determined δDf values of known Arctic-grown feathers from juveniles that grew their flight feathers on the breeding grounds. Flight feather δDf values of southward-migrating adults showed bimodal distributions for all three species. Negative values overlapped with species-specific juvenile values, identifying putative second fall birds with high-latitude grown juvenal feathers retained from the previous year. The more positive values identified older adults who grew their feathers at mid- and low latitudes. Importantly, δDf analysis successfully identified first-winter and second-fall birds not detected by plumage-based aging. Flight feather wear alone was a poor basis for age classification because scores overlapped extensively between putative second fall birds and older adults. Flight feather hydrogen isotope analysis enables more definitive assignment of age classes when standard plumage methods are unreliable.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".