Exposing migratory sparrows to<i>Plasmodium</i>suggests costs of resistance, not necessarily of infection itself
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Migratory birds move through multiple habitats and encounter a diverse suite of parasites. This raises concern over migrants' role in transporting infectious disease between breeding and wintering grounds, and along migratory flyways. Trade-offs between flight and immune defenses could interfere with infected individuals' migratory timing and success, potentially affecting infection dynamics. However, experimental evidence that parasitic infection affects migratory preparation or timing remains scant. We hypothesized that birds encountering hematozoan parasites shortly before migration incur physical costs (reduced body condition) and behavioral costs (delayed migration), due to the infection itself and/or to the demands of mounting an immune response. We experimentally inoculated song sparrows (Melospiza melodia) with Plasmodium shortly before fall migration. We monitored infection and body composition for 2 weeks after inoculation, and used radiotelemetry to track timing of migratory departure for another 7 weeks after release. Inoculated individuals that resisted infection had lower lean mass 12 days post exposure, relative to controls and infected individuals. This suggests trade-offs between body composition and immune defenses that might reduce migration success of resistant individuals. Despite group differences in body composition prior to release, we did not detect significant differences in timing of migration departure several weeks later. Thus, malarial infection did not appear to incur detectable costs to body composition or to migratory timing, at least when exposure occurs several weeks before migration. This study is novel considering not only the costs of infection, but also the costs of resisting infection, in an experimental context.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".