Migration distance does not predict blood parasitism in a migratory songbird
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Migration can influence host–parasite dynamics in animals by increasing exposure to parasites, by reducing the energy available for immune defense, or by culling of infected individuals. These mechanisms have been demonstrated in several comparative analyses; however, few studies have investigated whether conspecific variation in migration distance may also be related to infection risk. Here, we ask whether autumn migration distance, inferred from stable hydrogen isotope analysis of summer‐grown feathers ( δ 2 H f ) in Europe, correlates with blood parasite prevalence and intensity of infection for willow warblers ( Phylloscopus trochilus ) wintering in Zambia. We also investigated whether infection was correlated with individual condition (assessed via corticosterone, scaled mass index, and feather quality). We found that 43% of birds were infected with Haemoproteus palloris (lineage WW1). Using generalized linear models, we found no relationship between migration distance and either Haemoproteus infection prevalence or intensity. There was spatial variation in breeding ground origins of infected versus noninfected birds, with infected birds originating from more northern sites than noninfected birds, but this difference translated into only slightly longer estimated migration distances (~214 km) for infected birds. We found no relationship between body condition indices and Haemoproteus infection prevalence or intensity. Our results do not support any of the proposed mechanisms for migration effects on host–parasite dynamics and cautiously suggest that other factors may be more important for determining individual susceptibility to disease in migratory bird species.
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 | 0.001 |
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".