Patterns of territorial space use by Shining Sunbeams ( <i>Aglaeactis cupripennis</i> ), tropical montane hummingbirds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For many territorial hummingbirds, habitat use is influenced primarily by the interaction between resource acquisition and non-foraging behaviors such as territory advertisement and defense. Previous research has highlighted the importance of foraging-associated habitat features like resource density and distribution in determining the space-use patterns of hummingbirds. Less is known, however, about how habitat selection associated with non-foraging behaviors influences space use by territorial species. We used radio telemetry to examine patterns of territorial space use by Shining Sunbeams (Aglaeactis cupripennis) in high Andean montane forests near Manu National Park, Peru, and Bosque Comunal “El Carmen” near Chordeleg, Ecuador. We quantified within-territory habitat characteristics related to resource acquisition and non-foraging behaviors such as territory advertisement and defense. We found that Shining Sunbeams showed high use of core areas in territories where foraging effort was relatively low. We found no relationship, however, between the position of core areas and habitat characteristics associated with territory defense, predator avoidance, or other non-foraging behaviors. We also found no relationship between use of non-core areas and habitat use based on resource acquisition. Thus, patterns of territorial space use by Shining Sunbeams may be characterized by core areas not determined by foraging behavior. Further studies examining territorial behaviors and the influence of intrusion pressure will help identify the underlying determinants of territory space use by this and other species of Andean hummingbirds.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".