Effect of Brood Size Manipulation on Offspring Physiology: An Experiment with Passerine Birds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The environment experienced during ontogeny has a significant impact on the physiological condition of offspring. This, in turn, forecasts survival probabilities and future reproductive potential. Despite the prominent role that the concept of condition plays in evolutionary studies, the physiological and biochemical characters that define it remain relatively unexplored. In this study, we quantified the impact of brood size manipulations on the physiology and biochemistry of nestling tree swallows (Tachycineta bicolor) shortly before they fledged. Over two breeding seasons, we either increased or decreased the number of individuals in a brood by a single nestling. Every 2-4 days, we determined the resting rate of oxygen consumption [V(O(2))] of individuals in each brood. Growth was followed until 16 days of age, at which time, to look for potential trade-offs in energy allocation, we measured total lipid mass, skeletal muscle and organ mass, indices of blood oxygen-carrying capacity and the activities of key metabolic enzymes in various tissues. Surprisingly, there was a minimal response of most characters to brood manipulation, suggesting that physiological and biochemical development is relatively invariant except perhaps under extreme conditions. Individuals reared in artificially enlarged broods, however, had a significantly lower body mass, body-size-adjusted [V(O(2))], gizzard mass and total lipid mass. These individuals also had decreased activity of cardiac 3-hydroxyacyl CoA dehydrogenase, suggesting a decreased capacity for oxidation of fatty acids. How these characters affect survival or the future adult phenotype remains unknown.
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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".