MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038958608 · doi:10.1093/conphys/coaa054

Differences in adrenocortical responses between urban and rural burrowing owls: poorly-known underlying mechanisms and their implications for conservation

2020· article· en· W3038958608 on OpenAlexaff
Antonio Palma, Julio Blas, José L. Tella, Sonia Cabezas, Tracy A. Marchant, Martina Carrete

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Physiology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersMinisterio de Economía y Competitividad
KeywordsUrbanizationBiologyCorticosteroneWildlifeGlucocorticoidHabitatEcologyZoologyEndocrinologyHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal/interrenal (HPA) axis of vertebrates integrates external information and orchestrates responses to cope with energy-demanding and stressful events through changes in circulating glucocorticoid levels. Urbanization exposes animals to a wide variety of ever-changing stimuli caused by human activities that may affect local wildlife populations. Here, we empirically tested the hypothesis that urban and rural owls (Athene cunicularia) show different adrenocortical responses to stress, with urban individuals showing a reduced HPA-axis response compared to rural counterparts to cope with the high levels of human disturbance typical of urban areas. We applied a standard capture-restraint protocol to measure baseline levels and stress-induced corticosterone (CORT) responses. Urban and rural owls showed similar circulating baseline CORT levels. However, maximum CORT levels were attained earlier and were of lower magnitude in urban compared to rural owls, which showed a more pronounced and long-lasting response. Variability in CORT responses was also greater in rural owls and contained the narrower variability displayed by urban ones. These results suggest that only individuals expressing low-HPA-axis responses can thrive in cities, a pattern potentially mediated by three alternative and non-exclusive hypotheses: phenotypic plasticity, natural selection and matching habitat choice. Due to their different conservation implications, we recommend further research to properly understand wildlife responses to humans in an increasingly urbanized world.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.158 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConservation PhysiologySame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207