Feather mites and birds: an interaction mediated by uropygial gland size?
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
Feather mites (Arachnida: Acari: Astigmata) feed mainly on secretions of the uropygial gland of birds. Here, we use analyses corrected for phylogeny and body size to show that there is a positive correlation between the size of this gland and mite abundance in passerine birds at an interspecific level during the breeding season, suggesting that the gland mediates interactions between mites and birds. As predicted on the basis of hypothesized waterproofing and antibiotic functions of uropygial gland secretions, riparian/marsh bird species had larger glands and higher mite loads than birds living in less mesic terrestrial environments. An unexpected pattern was a steeper relationship between mite load and gland size in migratory birds than in residents. If moderate mite loads are beneficial to a host but high loads detrimental, this could create complex selection regimes in which gland size influences mite load and vice versa. Mites may exert selective pressures on gland size of their hosts that has resulted in smaller glands among migratory bird species, suggesting that smaller glands may have evolved in these birds to attenuate a possible detrimental effect of feather mites when present in large numbers.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it