MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2903305036 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0208210

Should I stay, or should I go: Modeling optimal flight initiation distance in nesting birds

2018· article· en· W2903305036 on OpenAlexafffund
Liam Dowling, Frances Bonier

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversities Space Research Association
KeywordsNesting (process)Bird flightZoologyBiologyEcologyWingEngineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flight initiation distance (FID)-the distance at which an individual leaves in response to the approach of a perceived threat-provides a measurement of risk-taking behavior. If individuals optimize their FID, this distance should reflect the point at which the fitness resulting from leaving exceeds the fitness resulting from all other possible decisions. Previous theory of FID has often been aimed at explaining this behavior in foraging individuals. Yet flight initiation in response to approaching threats occurs in a range of contexts that might influence optimal behavior. In breeding individuals, risk-taking decisions that are made at a location of offspring care (e.g., a nest or den) can have significant effects on fitness. Here, we develop a theoretical model of distances at which a parent bird flushes from a nest in response to an approaching threat. We estimate parent fitness with regards to characteristics of the parent (reproductive values, detection distance, and cost of lost parental care cost), the nest (concealment and accessibility), and the approaching predator (detection capability and predation success), developing a dichotomous scenario between staying at the nest or leaving at varying distances. Using a generalized comparison of the benefits of leaving versus staying, we find that increasing costs of lost parental care, probability of predation of the parent due to fleeing, or current reproductive value lead to more instances of staying at the nest. In a complementary approach with specified parameters based on biologically-informed factors that likely influence a predator-prey encounter, we find that increasing the current reproductive value, concealment of the nest, or costs of lost parental care decrease optimal FID and can lead to the parent staying at the nest. Other factors, such as increasing residual reproductive value, predation success, and predator capability of detecting the nest, increase optimal FID with some instances of costs of fleeing being so great that staying becomes an optimal strategy. Our theory provides a framework to explain variation in FID among nesting species and individuals and could provide a foundation for future empirical investigations of risk-taking behavior.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicAvian ecology and behavior→French-language works237,207→