Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied nesting effort and success of Northern Pintails (Anas acuta) in southern Alberta. Annual nesting success estimates ranged from 6–18%. Clutch size averaged 7.2, and declined in a simple curvilinear fashion with nest initiation date. We found no relationship between egg size and clutch size or evidence from one year to the next of a trade-off between current and future investment in eggs. Within-year renesting rate ranged from 55%, based on a sample of 20 decoy-trapped females that lost their first nests to predators, to 85% based on a sample of 13 nest-trapped females forced to renest when we removed their clutches. Greater investment in initial clutches led to longer delays in laying replacement clutches. Because delays in renesting are costly (late-nesting females produce fewer offspring), females must contend with a trade-off between maximizing reproductive output in initial clutches versus the risk of delayed renesting if the first clutch should fail. We suggest that pintail reproductive traits have evolved primarily in response to short nesting seasons and variable environments.
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 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) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".