The costs of kleptoparasitism: a study of mixed-species seabird breeding colonies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mixed-species assemblages are common in nature, providing mutual benefits to associating species including anti-predator advantages or resource facilitation. However, associating with other species may also impose costs through kleptoparasitism (food theft). Identification of these costs, and how they vary when different species breed alongside one another, is essential to understand the payoffs of mixed-species assemblages. We explore the costs of kleptoparasitism for greater crested terns Thalasseus bergii provisioning offspring at a single-species colony, where individuals suffer kleptoparasitism from conspecifics, and at a mixed colony where terns breed alongside Hartlaub’s gulls Chroicocephalus hartlaubii and are vulnerable to both intra and interspecific kleptoparasitism. Gull presence likely contributes to increases in both kleptoparasitic attacks and the proportion of prey lost or stolen during provisioning, relative to the single-species colony. Provisioning adults suffered additional energetic costs in response to gull kleptoparasitism, requiring more attempts to deliver prey, taking longer to do so, and swallowing more prey (to the detriment of their offspring). Gulls also appear to increase the duration of tern vulnerability to kleptoparasitism, because they continued to steal food from adults and chicks after precocial chicks left the nest, when intraspecific kleptoparasitism is negligible. Terns breeding in a mixed colony, therefore, suffer direct and indirect costs through decreased provisioning and increased provisioning effort, which may ultimately affect reproductive success, resulting in colony decline where kleptoparasitism is frequent. This study illustrates how forming a mixed-species seabird breeding assemblage has costs as well as benefits, potentially fluctuating between a parasitic and a mutualistic relationship.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".