Understanding the function of nocturnal song in ovenbirds: males do not countersing at night
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many diurnal bird species vocalize at night, however the function of nocturnal song is, generally, still poorly understood. Previous research has suggested that nocturnal song may serve a social function and is influenced by environmental factors. To test whether males attend to the nocturnal song of conspecifics, we experimentally exposed ovenbirds Seiurus aurocapilla to nocturnal flight songs, and recorded their response both during the night and during the following dawn chorus. We compared latency to song and vocal output before and after playback exposure to determine if males altered their vocalizations in response to exposure to flight songs from an unknown male. We found no evidence of counter singing or change in nocturnal song output, nor a change in vocal output during the dawn chorus following playback exposure. Our results suggest that, in ovenbirds, nocturnal song does not serve as an intraspecific social function. Nocturnal song, through rare, may be significant in the mating systems of some diurnal bird species, and requires additional study.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".