Experimentally altered plumage brightness of female Tree Swallows (<i>Tachycineta bicolor</i>) influences nest site retention and reproductive success
Bibliographic record
Abstract
That ornamental traits of females can act as signals of quality has gained empirical support, but whether and how such ornaments of females mediate social interactions with conspecifics remains less clear. Female Tree Swallows (Tachycineta bicolor (Vieillot, 1808)) aggressively compete for and defend nest sites, and as such, nest site intrusions by conspecific females challenging ownership of a nest may prevent territory-owning females from dishonestly displaying ornamented plumage. We tested whether plumage brightness of female Tree Swallows influences nest site retention and reproductive success by experimentally enhancing or reducing their plumage brightness relative to controls prior to breeding. Females with reduced brightness were more likely to retain their nests sites and breed relative to control females and females with experimentally enhanced brightness. Females displaying enhanced brightness also tended to initiate clutches later than females with control and reduced brightness. Overall, lower nest site retention and reproductive success for females with enhanced brightness is consistent with social costs imposed on individuals dishonestly signalling high quality. Future studies in female birds should consider whether costs of losing a nest site to intruding conspecific females, especially in species where nest sites are limited, is a mechanism that maintains the honesty of signals of quality.
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) | 0.002 | 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".