Incubation temperature influences sex ratio and offspring’s body composition in Zebra Finches (<i>Taeniopygia</i> <i>guttata</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Incubation temperature has the potential to influence offspring sex, phenotype, and survival, particularly in species with temperature-dependent sex determination. However, relatively little is known about how incubation temperature affects sex ratio and offspring condition in other animals. Incubating birds allocate varying time for egg incubation depending on the parents’ condition and ambient temperature, likely altering nest microclimate. To understand how incubation temperature impacts offspring phenotype in birds, we artificially incubated Zebra Finch (Taeniopygia guttata (Vieillot, 1817)) eggs at 36.2, 37.4, or 38.4 °C during the entire incubation period and examined sex ratio and offspring quality. We found that incubation temperature of 36.2 °C resulted in a greater likelihood of a young being male compared with 37.4 °C, indicating that it is more likely for males to survive until the juvenile stage compared with females in the 36.2 °C group. We also found sex-specific effects of incubation temperature on body composition. Although incubation temperature did not affect fat or lean mass of female young, male offspring from the 38.4 °C group had significantly less lean mass throughout their lives compared with males from 37.4 or 36.2 °C. This study shows that there are sex differences in the effects of incubation temperature, and variable incubation temperature has a capacity to influence offspring secondary sex ratio and body condition in songbirds.
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".