Reduced reproductive performance associated with warmer ambient temperatures during incubation in a winter‐breeding, food‐storing passerine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Timing of reproduction can influence individual fitness whereby early breeders tend to have higher reproductive success than late breeders. However, the fitness consequences of timing of breeding may also be influenced by environmental conditions after the commencement of breeding. We tested whether ambient temperatures during the incubation and early nestling periods modulated the effect of laying date on brood size and dominant juvenile survival in gray jays (Perisoreus canadensis), a sedentary boreal species whose late winter nesting depends, in part, on caches of perishable food. Previous evidence has suggested that warmer temperatures degrade the quality of these food hoards, and we asked whether warmer ambient temperatures during the incubation and early nestling periods would be associated with smaller brood sizes and lower summer survival of dominant juveniles. We used 38 years of data from a range‐edge population of gray jays in Algonquin Provincial Park, Ontario, where the population has declined over 50% since the study began. Consistent with the “hoard‐rot” hypothesis, we found that cold temperatures during incubation were associated with larger brood sizes in later breeding attempts, but temperatures had little effect on brood size for females breeding early in the season. This is the first evidence that laying date and temperature during incubation interactively influence brood size in any bird species. We did not find evidence that ambient temperatures during the incubation period or early part of the nestling period influenced summer survival of dominant juveniles. Our findings provide evidence that warming temperatures are associated with some aspects of reduced reproductive performance in a species that is reliant on cold temperatures to store perishable food caches, some of which are later consumed during the reproductive period.
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".