Physiological predictors of reproductive performance in the European Starling (Sturnus vulgaris)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Costs of reproduction are assumed to be widespread, and to have a physiological basis, but the mechanisms driving decreased survival and future fecundity remain elusive. Our overall goals were to assess whether physiological variables are related to workload ability or immediate fitness consequences and if they mediate future survival or reproductive success. We investigated individual variation in physiological state at two breeding stages (incubation, chick-rearing) in female European starlings ( Sturnus vulgaris ), for first-and second-broods over two years. Specifically, we measured a suite of 13 physiological traits related to aerobic/metabolic capacity, oxidative stress and muscle damage, intermediary metabolism and energy supply, and immune function. We tested for relationships to traits for workload (e.g. nest visit rate) and fitness (current reproduction, survival and future reproduction). There was little co-variation among the 13 physiological traits, either in incubating or chick-rearing birds. There were some systematic differences in incubation versus chick-rearing physiology. Chick-rearing birds had lower hematocrit and plasma creatine kinase but higher hemoglobin, triglyceride and uric acid levels. Only plasma corticosterone was repeatable between incubation and chick-rearing. We assessed relationships in a univariate manner, and found very few significant relationships between incubation or chick-rearing physiology and measures of workload, current productivity, future fecundity or survival. Variability in ecological context may complicate the relationship between physiology and behavior. Additionally, individuals may regulate different aspects of their physiology independently, making detection of physiological mediators of cost of reproduction difficult. In a companion paper (Cohen et al. submitted) we explore the utility of multivariate analysis (Principal Components Analysis, Mahalanobis distance) of the same data to account for potentially complex physiological integration.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".