MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768268370 · doi:10.1163/1568539x-00003464

Urban mountain chickadees (Poecile gambeli) begin vocalizing earlier, and have greater dawn chorus output than rural males

2017· article· en· W2768268370 on OpenAlexafffund
Kristen L. D. Marini, Matthew W. Reudink, Steffi LaZerte, Ken A. Otter

Bibliographic record

VenueBehaviour · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaThompson Rivers University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaThompson Rivers University
KeywordsUrbanizationHabitatForageSeasonal breederEcologyGeographyCanopyVegetation (pathology)Biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vocal output during the dawn chorus is often an honest indicator of male quality, where males with greater access to food and in better condition produce more vocalizations. We compare the vocal output among male mountain chickadees living along an urbanization gradient to assess how urbanization affects male signalling. Chickadees forage in the canopy, and because urban habitats are associated with lower canopy volume, we predicted that urban habitats may offer lower food and thus lead to reduced song output. Contrary to our predictions, males in more urbanized habitats had greater vocal output. We suggest that despite decreased canopy cover, urban birds may have greater access to food in both the breeding and pre-breeding seasons due to differences in both supplementary resources and vegetation composition of urban vs rural landscapes in our area. Living in urban habitats may allow males to enter the breeding season in better condition.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations23
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehaviourSame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207