Faecal<i>Escherichia coli</i>and<i>Chlamydophila psittaci</i>in the Superb Lyrebird<i>Menura novaehollandiae</i>: Host Sex and Age Effects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Superb Lyrebird is a sexually dimorphic passerine that although is not considered endangered, it has been declining in population size since the 1940s due primarily to urban development. Recent reports suggest that lyrebirds may be threatened by chlamydial infection. We studied levels of faecal infection by two microparasites in lyrebirds: Chlamydophila psittaci and Escherichia coli in the Sherbrooke Forest, south-eastern Australia. Fresh faecal samples were obtained from 33 lyrebirds (15 adult females, 13 adult males and 5 juveniles) — estimated of 27.5% of the population, all of them tested negative to Ch. psittaci. E. coli prevalence was compared between adult males and females and no difference was found. This result is expected, for instance, if E. coli is sexually transmitted and lyrebirds are promiscuous. Trends for juveniles to be more parasitized than adults were detected, but they were statistically not significant. Behavioural analyses of video footage indicate that E. coli infected birds did not allocate more or less time to any of the activities considered than did non infected birds. This might suggest that E. coli infection in lyrebirds is relatively benign, and behavioural effects may thus be subtle. No significant differences were found in specific measurements of foraging behaviour but non infected birds tended to scratch more frequently than infected birds.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".