Risk allocation: acute and chronic predator exposure have contrasting effects on Song Sparrow (<i>Melospiza melodia</i>) singing behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increasing the danger posed by predators may cause prey animals to alter their behaviour. For example, they may be more vigilant and so feed more slowly. Breeding male Song Sparrows (Melospiza melodia (A. Wilson, 1810)) spend much time in conspicuous, loud song, which is an important behaviour for territorial defense and for mate attraction. We measured their singing behaviour in relation to both chronic (active Cooper’s Hawk (Accipiter cooperii (Bonaparte, 1828)) nest nearby) and acute (playback of hawk calls) predator exposure. We found that proximity to a Cooper’s Hawk nest had little or no influence. In contrast, the response to acute exposure was strong and immediate: Song Sparrows reduced the song rate and the proportion of time spent singing, lowered perch height, and increased concealment. The decline in the amount of song during the few minutes following playback attributable to the acute exposure was 34.6%. We analyze these results in light of theories about how animals adjust risk taking in response to predation danger. Given that the numbers of their predators have risen steadily for the past few decades and affect the level of singing, we consider the implications for trend estimates of songbird populations based on surveys using auditory methods.
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".