MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799473788 · doi:10.1590/1809-4392201703932

Biting the hand that feeds you: wedge-billed hummingbird is a nectar robber of a sicklebill-adapted Andean bellflower

2018· article· en· W2799473788 on OpenAlexafffund
Mannfred M. A. Boehm

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Amazonica · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversidad Nacional Agraria La MolinaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsHummingbirdNectarBiologyMutualism (biology)EcologyPollinationZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT I report on nectar robbing behavior of the wedge-billed hummingbird, Schistes geoffroyi (Trochilidae) on the Andean bellflower, Centropogon granulosus (Campanulaceae). Many species of Centropogon are characterized by an abruptly curved corolla tube which is likely specialized for pollination by sicklebill hummingbirds (Eutoxeres), as evident from the matching curvature of flower and bill. Nectar robbing has been documented for some Centropogon spp., but not for sicklebill pollinated C. granulosus. Given recent developments and interest in the Centropogon-sicklebill mutualism, it is pertinent to document any natural history observations that may underlie the ecology and evolution of this pollination system. The establishment of wedge-billed hummingbird as a nectar robber of C. granulosus calls for a new assessment of the ecology and evolution of the highly specialized Centropogon-sicklebill mutualism.

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 score0.004
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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa AmazonicaSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207