Nestling tree swallows (<i>Tachycineta bicolor</i>) alter begging behaviour in response to odour of familiar adults, but not their nests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Communication using chemical cues is important for many taxa, including birds, but the use of olfaction for intraspecific communication has been investigated only recently in passerines and is understudied in nestlings. To address this knowledge gap, we explored whether nestling tree swallows ( Tachycineta bicolor ) would recognize and respond to chemical cues of conspecifics, specifically testing begging responses to familiar and unfamiliar nest and adult odours. For the nest odour experiment, nests were treated with either orange essential oil or distilled water to create scented and unscented (control) odour environments, respectively. For the adult odour experiment, adults attending the nestlings were considered “familiar adults” and adults attending a different brood in the population were considered “unfamiliar adults.” We found that begging responses of nestlings did not differ in response to orange oil odour or water, but nestlings begged significantly longer and more intensely in response to odours of a familiar than an unfamiliar adult, regardless of adult sex. This provides evidence that tree swallows use chemical cues to alter their behaviour and opens up many exciting avenues of future research.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
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".