MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2760373773 · doi:10.1111/1365-2435.12988

Biomarker of burden: Feather corticosterone reflects energetic expenditure and allostatic overload in captive waterfowl

2017· article· en· W2760373773 on OpenAlexafffund
David W. Johns, Tracy A. Marchant, Graham D. Fairhurst, John R. Speakman, Robert G. Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueFunctional Ecology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitute for Wetland and Waterfowl Research, Ducks Unlimited Canada
KeywordsAllostatic loadAllostasisBiologyCorticosteroneFeatherGlucocorticoidBasal metabolic rateContext (archaeology)LongevityEndocrinologyInternal medicineHormoneEcologyPhysiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Allostatic load describes the interplay between energetic demand and availability and is highly context dependent, varying between seasons and life‐history stages. When energy demands exceed physiological set points modulated by glucocorticoid hormones, individuals may experience allostatic overload and transition between stages in sub‐optimal physiological states. Corticosterone, the major glucocorticoid hormone regulating energy expenditure in birds, is incorporated into growing feathers (CORTf), and it has been suggested that CORTfreflects long‐term records of allostatic load during feather growth. However, relationships between allostatic load and CORTfhave not been adequately evaluated. If such relationships exist, the use of CORTfto investigate cross‐seasonal effects could provide novel insights into impacts of past allostatic load and/or overload events. We tested whether experimental increases in daily workload during two adjacent life‐history stages would be reflected in CORTflevels, and examined if CORTflevels reflected either current energetic demand or allostatic load prior to feather growth. Daily workloads in female mallardAnas platyrhynchosducklings were increased over a 6‐week period using physical obstacles and/or carrying back‐mounted weights. We measured daily energy expenditure, growth, body mass, and CORTfin growing ducklings. Then, we induced feather moult and reapplied combinations of workload treatments for an additional 6 weeks to investigate whether effects of past energetic demands would be detected in future CORTflevels. Ducklings confronted with higher workloads during development had reduced body mass, growth rates and consequently higher daily energy expenditure and CORTfvalues compared to controls. When ducklings were fully developed, CORTfpatterns in birds re‐exposed to workload treatments reflected only current, rather than past, energetic demands. However, under allostatic overload conditions, past levels of CORTfwere positively associated with CORTfin the subsequent moult. Our study confirms the previously untested assumption that CORTfreflects energetic demand during the period of feather growth in a precocial bird. We show that allostatic overload conditions early in life, which temporarily suppress growth, can be detected using CORTf, an event potentially missed in studies which rely solely on measures of body condition alone. We suggest that CORTfcan provide a valuable biomarker of allostatic load and overload conditions during the period of feather growth, but highlight how context should be considered for studies using CORTfto investigate influences of carryover effects. Our study contributes to building a physiological foundation to inform interpretations of ecological patterns using CORTf. A plain language summary is available for this article.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations32
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFunctional EcologySame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207