Do plant secondary metabolites help drive avian granivore seed selection?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plant secondary metabolites (PSMs), found virtually universally throughout the plant kingdom, function in myriad ways, including defense against enemies, attraction of pollinators, communication between plants, and protection against various abiotic stressors. Extensive research has examined how PSMs mediate interactions between plants and herbivores and plant and frugivores. In contrast, little research has investigated their potential role in defense against granivores. In two seed selection experiments, we quantified seed preference of house sparrows and native granivores, respectively, when offered each of 10 native seeds and proso millet, a commercial bird seed. House sparrows and native granivores greatly preferred millet over all offered native seeds. House sparrows largely rejected seeds of all five wildflower species, but native granivores preferred three of the five wildflowers. House sparrows readily consumed seeds of all five native grass species, but native granivores rejected Canada rye. House sparrows and native granivores both rejected seeds of Illinois bundle flower. Although seed preferences in the non-native house sparrow and native granivores differed significantly, we have found no consistent relationship between seed selection and presence or absence of classes of plant secondary metabolites.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".