Bibliographic record
Abstract
Joint nesting is a relatively rare form of cooperative breeding in which two or more breeding group members of the same sex contribute genes to a clutch of eggs and cooperate in the care of young (Brown 1987; Vehrencamp 2000). Traditionally, joint nesting referred to multiple-female clutches. However, with the development of DNA techniques for assigning paternity, a growing number of cooperative species with shared-paternity clutches have been discovered. Joint-female (or communally laying) systems and joint-male (or cooperatively polyandrous) systems exhibit many important differences. Nevertheless, several avian joint-female species are also characterized by the presence of two or more adult males who share paternity to some degree. Here we focus on the diversity of joint-female systems, referring the reader to Chapter 10 and other reviews for discussions of breeding systems with male cobreeding (Faaborg and Patterson 1981; Hartley and Davies 1994; Ligon 1999). Most joint-female species are non-passerines. By contrast, helper-at-the-nest species, as well as cooperatively polyandrous species, are found among both the passerines and non-passerines. There may be a good explanation for this pattern. Communally laying species all share one important feature: males make a large contribution to incubation and care of the young. In some joint-female species males perform all of the incubation and subsequent care, whereas in others the males perform more than half of the incubation, including nocturnal incubation. In a survey of the phylogenetic origins of communal-laying species, all were found to arise in taxa with a history of strong male incubation (Vehrencamp 2000).
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.010 |
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".