Baseline corticosterone does not reflect iridescent plumage traits in female tree swallows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The production of high quality secondary sexual traits can be constrained by trade-offs in the allocation of energy and nutrients with other metabolic activities, and is mediated by physiological processes. In birds, the factors influencing male plumage quality have been well studied; however, factors affecting female plumage quality are poorly understood. Furthermore, it remains uncertain which physiological traits mediate the relationship between body condition and ornaments. In this three-year study of after-second-year female tree swallows ( Tachycineta bicolor ), we investigated (1) the relationship between baseline corticosterone near the end of the brood-rearing period (CORT BR ) and feather colour characteristics (hue, saturation, brightness) the following year, and (2) the relationship between baseline corticosterone measured during incubation (CORT I ) and brood rearing (CORT BR ), and feather colour in the same year. To control for reproductive effort, we included reproductive parameters as covariates in all analyses. In this first study between CORT and the plumage colour characteristics of a species bearing iridescent feathers, we did not find any relationship between CORT BR and the colour of subsequently-produced feathers, nor did we find any relationship between CORT I and the colour of feathers displayed during that breeding season. If CORT levels at the end of breeding carry over to influence the immediately subsequent moult period as we expect, our results generally indicate that structural plumage quality may not be as sensitive to circulating CORT levels compared to carotenoid-based colouration. Future studies, particularly those employing experimental manipulations of CORT during moult in species with iridescent traits, are necessary to fully determine the role glucocorticoids play in mediating the quality of secondary sexual characteristics.
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".