MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166554364 · doi:10.1139/z04-035

Nest stage, wind speed, and air temperature affect the nest defence behaviours of burrowing owls

2004· article· en· W2166554364 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Ryan J. Fisher, Ray G. Poulin, L. Danielle Todd, R. Mark Brigham

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWorld Wildlife Fund
KeywordsNest (protein structural motif)EcologyBiologyWind speedAir temperatureReproductive successZoologyMeteorologyGeographyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effect of nest stage on nest defence responses has been fairly well established but the impact of weather conditions has been largely ignored. We examined the effects of nest stage, number of previous visits, wind speed, and air temperature on burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia (Molina, 1782)) defence of nests from a human intruder. We found that burrowing owls changed nest defence tactics from retreat behaviour to more confrontational behaviour once eggs hatched. Aggressiveness was significantly reduced as wind velocity increased and when temperatures were warmer. We found no evidence for a change in owl defence behaviour with the number of previous visits to a nest. Although not statistically significant, there was a tendency for burrowing owls to allow closer approaches and to not retreat as far once eggs had hatched. Wind speed did not have an effect on retreat or approach distances, and owls allowed us to get significantly closer to the nest before retreating when air temperatures were warm. There are a multitude of factors that could affect nesting success and thus fitness of birds, but our study shows that routine climatic events such as warm weather had a measurable impact on how a bird defended its reproductive investment.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations44
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207