MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2180328674 · doi:10.1676/04-087.1

VARIATION IN INCUBATION PATTERNS OF RED-WINGED BLACKBIRDS NESTING AT LAGOONS AND PONDS IN EASTERN ONTARIO

2005· article· en· W2180328674 on OpenAlexaffabout
J. Ryan Zimmerling, C. Davison Ankney

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Wilson Bulletin · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and biodiversity studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncubationBeaverBiologyForagingEcologyHabitatIncubation periodRange (aeronautics)SewageZoologyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We studied incubation patterns and hatchability of Red-winged Blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus) nesting in two different wetland habitats—beaver ponds and sewage lagoons—in eastern Ontario during 1999–2001. We presumed that, if incubating Red-winged Blackbirds could acquire food more readily at sewage lagoons than at beaver ponds, they should respond by taking fewer and shorter foraging bouts, which would result in longer bouts of attentiveness, shorter incubation periods, and higher hatchability of eggs. Although differences were small, female foraging bouts were shorter and bouts of attentiveness were longer at sewage lagoons than they were at beaver ponds. Incubation constancies were subsequently greater, and, ultimately, incubation periods at sewage lagoons were shorter. Shorter incubation periods at sewage lagoons, however, did not result in increased hatchability. Our results suggest that, in habitats where incubating Red-winged Blackbirds can acquire food more readily, incubation periods may become shorter and incubation constancies may become higher.

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 score0.314
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations39
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Wilson BulletinSame topicEcology and biodiversity studiesFrench-language works237,207