The two oxpecker species reveal the role of movement rates and foraging intensity in species coexistence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
oxpecker species are specialized passerines that forage for ticks and other food particles on the body of ungulates in the African savannahs. One of their intriguing features is their ability to coexist despite sharing the same, specialized diet. Using co-occurrence data (photographs of giraffes with oxpeckers on them) and approximate Bayesian computing, we demonstrate that yellow-billed oxpeckers changed host faster than red-billed oxpeckers and appeared to displace red-billed oxpeckers from preferred giraffe body parts. Conversely, red-billed oxpeckers exhibited a fuller use of each host and displaced yellow-billed oxpeckers from distal giraffe body parts. These findings highlight that the partition of giraffe hosts in two separate niches was only part of the coexistence story in this species pair. More precisely, the oxpeckers shared the resource by exploiting it at different rates. They engaged in different trade-offs between giving-up density, patch discovery rate and competitor displacement ability. They illustrate the importance of the time frame of interactions.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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 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".