Seasonal patterns in reproductive success of temperate‐breeding birds: Experimental tests of the date and quality hypotheses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract For organisms in seasonal environments, individuals that breed earlier in the season regularly attain higher fitness than their late‐breeding counterparts. Two primary hypotheses have been proposed to explain these patterns: The quality hypothesis contends that early breeders are of better phenotypic quality or breed on higher quality territories, whereas the date hypothesis predicts that seasonally declining reproductive success is a response to a seasonal deterioration in environmental quality. In birds, food availability is thought to drive deteriorating environmental conditions, but few experimental studies have demonstrated its importance while also controlling for parental quality. We tested predictions of the date hypothesis in tree swallows ( Tachycineta bicolor ) over two breeding seasons and in two locations within their breeding range in Canada. Nests were paired by clutch initiation date to control for parental quality, and we delayed the hatching date of one nest within each pair. Subsequently, brood sizes were manipulated to mimic changes in per capita food abundance, and we examined the effects of manipulations, as well as indices of environmental and parental quality, on nestling quality, fledging success, and return rates. Reduced reproductive success of late‐breeding individuals was causally related to a seasonal decline in environmental quality. Declining insect biomass and enlarged brood sizes resulted in nestlings that were lighter, in poorer body condition, structurally smaller, had shorter and slower growing flight feathers and were less likely to survive to fledge. Our results provide evidence for the importance of food resources in mediating seasonal declines in offspring quality and survival.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".