MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

TIME AND RECRUITMENT COSTS AS CURRENCIES IN MANIPULATION STUDIES ON THE COSTS OF REPRODUCTION

2006· article· en· W2172058923 on OpenAlexafffund
Dave Shutler, Robert G. Clark, Carla Fehr, Antony W. Diamond

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanAcadia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInnovative Research Group Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFledgeBiologyAvian clutch sizeOffspringHatchingReproductionBroodClutchEcologyZoologyDemographyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Life history theory predicts that parents will have lower Darwinian fitness if they tend clutches that are above or below the size they naturally produce. We experimentally tested for relationships between fitness and clutch size in Tree Swallow (Tachycineta bicolor) offspring and parents. Over 130 trios of nests initiated on the same day were randomly divided among reduce (-3 eggs), control (3 eggs picked up and replaced), or add (+3 eggs) manipulations. Pre-manipulation modal clutch size was six eggs (range before manipulations was 1-10; afterwards, it was 1-11). Hatching took longer in larger clutches, but the proportion of eggs hatching and fledging was similar for clutches from 4 to 10, so that clutches of 10 produced the maximum number of fledgling. Parental feeding rates were higher for larger broods, but per capita feeds to nestlings were fewer, and nestlings were smaller. Nonetheless, survival of both young and adults, based on recaptures in subsequent years, was not significantly affected by manipulations. Manipulations also had no significant effect on subsequent reproduction, including the number of fledglings produced by either local recruits or returning breeders. Collectively, our results failed to detect fitness costs associated with tending larger clutches for either parents or the offspring reared and suggested directional selection for larger clutch size. However, because clutches that hatch later produce fewer recruits, the extra days required to lay more eggs and to fledge extra young may eliminate a large part of the advantage that would accrue to parents producing enlarged clutches. For example, our data suggest that there may be less than a 16% benefit to producing nine instead of six eggs, rather than 50%, as is suggested by experimentally manipulated egg numbers alone. Thus, time, rather than costs of reproduction, may be the crucial constraint selecting against Tree Swallows laying larger clutches.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.304
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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations90
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcologySame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207