MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2511501918 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v130i2.1837

Aberrant Colouration in the Atlantic Puffin (<i>Fratercula arctica</i>), the Common Murre (<i>Uria aalge</i>), and the Thick-billed Murre (<i>U. lomvia</i>) from Atlantic Canada

2016· article· en· W2511501918 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Alexander L. Bond, Antony W. Diamond

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New BrunswickUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersDepartment of Environment and Conservation, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador
KeywordsPlumageMelanismUria aalgeAbnormalityZoologyBiologyHerringEcologySeabirdFisheryPredationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The colour of birds’ plumage and bare parts is an important feature in choice of mate, camouflage, thermoregulation, species recognition, and flight mechanics. Abnormalities in colouration occur in a variety of species and can have important consequences for an individual’s survival and fitness. We present 7 new cases of colouration abnormalities in 3 species of auk (Alcidae) and review previous reports to correctly assign the proper form of abnormality to specimens in museums or photographs. Of the 53 reported colouration abnormalities, we reclassified 42, progressive greying being the most common (18 or 19 cases out of 42, 43–45%), followed by brown (10/42 cases, 24%), in addition to 6 cases of melanism, 4 of dilution, 2 of partial leucism, and 1 likely somatic mutation. Properly describing the form of colour abnormality improves our understanding of the frequency, causes, and consequences of aberrant colouration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score0.852

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207