MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166351203 · doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.0012

Introduction. Integration of ecology and endocrinology in avian reproduction: a new synthesis

2007· article· en· W2166351203 on OpenAlexaff
John C. Wingfield, Tony D. Williams, Marcel E. Visser

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcologyBiologyReproductionPopulationSociologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Birds are some of the most familiar organisms of global ecosystems. Changes in the visibility and abundance of birds are therefore excellent indicators of population and physiological responses to habitat changes and are a major focus for public concern about detrimental environmental changes. In order to understand how birds respond to these challenges, it is essential to determine how the environment affects reproduction under natural conditions. The continuum from environmental variables (cues) to reproductive life-history traits depends upon a cascade of neural and physiological processes that determine the extent and rate at which birds will be able to adapt to changes in their environment. For a full understanding of this ability to adapt, ecologists and endocrinologists need to collaborate and build a common framework. The objective of this theme issue is to bring together a series of papers addressing how evolutionary ecologists and endocrinologists can collaborate directly using avian reproduction as a model system. First, we address the need to integrate ecology and endocrinology and what benefits to biological knowledge will be gained. The papers collected in this issue represent a new synthesis of ecology and endocrinology as discussed in three E-BIRD workshops. The three main foci are trade-offs and constraints, maternal effects and individual variation. Authors within each group present ecological and endocrinological aspects of their topics and many go on to outline testable hypotheses. Finally, we discuss where the major problems remain and how this issue points out where these need collaborative efforts of ecologists and endocrinologists. Specific challenges are raised to future researchers to break through intellectual barriers and explore new frontiers. This framework of topics will ultimately apply to all taxa because the principles involved are universal and hopefully will have direct application to programmes integrating organisms and genes throughout biological sciences.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations52
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207