Field Metabolic Rate Is Dependent on Time-Activity Budget in Ring-Billed Gulls (Larus delawarensis) Breeding in an Anthropogenic Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Environmental and behavioral factors have long been assumed to affect variation in avian field metabolic rate (FMR). However, due to the difficulties in measuring continuous behavior of birds over prolonged periods of time, complete time-activity budgets have rarely been examined in relation to FMR. Our objective was to determine the effect of activity (measured by detailed time-activity budgets) and a series of extrinsic and intrinsic factors on FMR of the omnivorous ring-billed gull (Larus delawarensis). The experiment was conducted during the incubation period when both members of the pair alternate between attending the nest-site and leaving the colony to forage in aquatic and anthropogenic environments (city, agricultural). FMR was determined using the doubly labeled water method. Time-activity budgets were extrapolated from spatio-temporal data (2-5 days) obtained from bird-borne GPS data loggers. Gulls had low FMRs compared to those predicted by allometric equations based on recorded FMRs from several seabird species. Gulls proportioned their time mainly to nest-site attendance (71% of total tracking time), which reduced FMR/g body mass, and was the best variable explaining energy expenditure. The next best variable was the duration of foraging trips, which increased FMR/g; FMR/g was also elevated by the proportion of time spent foraging or flying (17% and 8% of tracking time respectively). Most environmental variables measured did not impact FMR/g, however, the percent of time birds were subjected to temperatures below their lower critical temperature increased FMR. Time-activity budgets varied between the sexes, and with temperature and capture date suggesting that these variables indirectly affected FMR/g. The gulls foraged preferentially in anthropogenic-related habitats, which may have contributed to their low FMR/g due to the high availability of protein- and lipid-rich foods. This study demonstrates that activities were the best predictors of FMR/g in ring-billed gulls, thus providing strong support for this long-standing theory in bioenergetics.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".