MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

DOES EGG REJECTION ACCOUNT FOR THE LOW INCIDENCE OF COWBIRD PARASITISM IN CHESTNUT-COLLARED LONGSPURS (CALCARIUS ORNATUS)?

2002· article· en· W2180308206 on OpenAlexafffund
Stephen K. Davis, Dwight R. Klippenstine, R. Mark Brigham

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Auk · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersGovernment of CanadaMcMaster UniversityNational Fish and Wildlife FoundationWorld Wildlife Fund
KeywordsCowbirdParasitismNest (protein structural motif)Brood parasiteBiologyHost (biology)ZoologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We experimentally parasitized Chestnut-collared Longspur (Calcarius ornatus) nests with mimetic and nonmimetic Brown-headed Cowbird (Molothrus ater) eggs to determine whether the low frequency of parasitism reported for that grassland host is due to egg rejection behavior. Longspurs accepted all 23 mimetic eggs (real and wooden) and rejected 9 of 22 blue nonmimetic eggs. Our results suggest longspurs accept cowbird eggs even though they are physically capable of ejecting them from their nest. Thus, the low parasitism frequency reported for that species is not a result of egg rejection behavior, but may be due to antiparasite strategies that reduce their chances of being parasitized (e.g. nest defense behavior).

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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.956

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations10
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe AukSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207