Evidence of sociality in the timing and location of foraging in a colonial seabird
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social foraging behaviours, which range from cooperative hunting to local enhancement, can result in increased prey capture and access to information, which may significantly reduce time and energy costs of acquiring prey. In colonial species, it has been proposed that the colony itself may act as a site of social information transfer and group formation. However, conclusive evidence from empirical studies is lacking. In particular, most studies in colonial species have generally focussed on behaviours either at the colony or at foraging sites in isolation, and have failed to directly connect social associations at the colony to social foraging. In this study, we simultaneously tracked 85% of a population of Australasian gannets ( Morus serrator ) over multiple foraging trips, to study social associations at the colony and test whether these associations influence the location of foraging sites. We found that gannets positively associate with conspecifics while departing from the colony and that co-departing gannets have more similar initial foraging patches than individuals that did not associate at the colony. These results provide strong evidence for the theory that the colony may provide a source of information that influences foraging location.
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".