MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2981503473 · doi:10.1101/816603

The latitudinal gradient in hand-wing-index: global patterns and predictors of wing morphology in birds

2019· preprint· en· W2981503473 on OpenAlexafffund
Catherine Sheard, Montague H. C. Neate‐Clegg, Nico Alioravainen, Samuel E. I. Jones, Claire Vincent, Hannah E. A. MacGregor, Tom P. Bregman, Santiago Claramunt, Joseph A. Tobias

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ontario Museum
FundersClarendon FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNatural Environment Research CouncilUS-UK Fulbright CommissionSight Research UK
KeywordsBiological dispersalEcologyGeographyMacroecologyLatitudeHabitatProxy (statistics)BiologyBiogeographyDemographyStatisticsPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An organism’s ability to disperse influences many fundamental processes in ecology. However, standardised estimates of dispersal ability are rarely available, and thus the patterns and drivers of broad-scale variation in dispersal ability remain unclear. Here we present a global dataset of avian hand-wing index (HWI), an estimate of wingtip pointedness widely adopted as a proxy for flight efficiency and dispersal in birds. We show that HWI is correlated with geography and ecology across 10,391 (>99 %) bird species, increasing at higher latitudes and in migratory and/or non-territorial species. After controlling for these effects, the strongest predictor of HWI is temperature variability (i.e. seasonality), with secondary effects of diet and habitat type. Our analyses (1) reveal a prominent latitudinal gradient in HWI shaped by ecological and environmental factors, and (2) provide a global index of avian dispersal ability for wider use in community ecology, macroecology, and macroevolution. Statement of authorship The study was conceived by CS and JAT. Data collection was led by JAT, SC, and CS, with contributions from CS, MNC, NA, SEIJ, CV, HEAM, TPB, and SC. CS performed the analyses. CS and JAT wrote the manuscript and all authors revised the text.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicAvian ecology and behavior→French-language works237,207→