MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170626866 · doi:10.1093/beheco/arq208

Divergence in timing of parental care and migration in barnacle geese

2011· article· en· W2170626866 on OpenAlexaff
Rudy M. Jonker, Marije W. Kuiper, Lysanne Snijders, Sipke E. van Wieren, Ron Ydenberg, H.H.T. Prins

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Ecology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyOffspringBarnacleDivergence (linguistics)Paternal careFlywayPopulationEcologyParental investmentDemographyZoologyCrustaceanPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In migratory geese, the extended association of parents and offspring is thought to play a crucial role in culturally transmitting the migration strategy to the next generation. Goslings migrate with their parents and associate closely with them almost until the next breeding season. Families do not break up until spring migration, when the parent–offspring conflict intensifies during preparation for the next generation of offspring. Recently, the commencement of spring migration of the Russian population of the barnacle goose has been delayed by about 1 month. Here, we investigated whether the duration of parental care behavior changed with this alteration in migratory behavior. In contrast to our expectation, we found that parental care terminated well before the commencement of spring migration and that parent–offspring associations were nearly absent during spring migration. We argue that the mechanisms for determining the duration of parental care is different from that determining the commencement of spring migration; hence, we conclude that a divergence in timing has developed between both behaviors. A consequence of this divergence could be that the cultural transmission of migratory behavior is disrupted, possibly playing a role in the recent establishment of new populations of Barnacle geese across the Russian flyway.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score0.736

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.152 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral EcologySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207