Tree Swallow selection for wetlands in agricultural landscapes predicted by central-place foraging theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Millions of wetland basins, embedded in croplands and grasslands, are biodiversity hotspots in North America’s Prairie Pothole Region, but prairie wetlands continue to be degraded and drained, primarily for agricultural activities. Aerial insectivorous swallows are known to forage over water, but it is unclear whether swallows exhibit greater selection for wetlands relative to other habitats in croplands and grasslands. Central-place foraging theory suggests that habitat selectivity should increase with traveling distance from a central place, such that foragers compensate for traveling costs by selecting more profitable foraging habitat. Using global positioning system (GPS) tags, we evaluated habitat selection by female Tree Swallows (Tachycineta bicolor) at 4 sites containing wetlands and where terrestrial land cover was dominated by grasslands (grass, herbaceous cover) and/or cultivated cropland. We also used sweep-net transects to assess the abundance and biomass of flying insects in different habitats available to swallows (wetland pond margins, grassy field margins, and representative uplands). As expected for a central-place forager, GPS-tagged swallows selected more for wetland ponds (disproportionate to availability), and appeared to increasingly select for wetlands with increasing distance from their nests. On cropland-dominated sites, insect abundance and biomass tended to be higher in pond margins or grassy field margins compared to cropped uplands, while abundance and biomass were more uniform among sampled habitats at sites dominated by grass and herbaceous cover. Swallow habitat selection was not clearly explained by the distribution of sampled insects among habitats; however, traditional terrestrial sampling methods may not adequately reflect prey distribution and availability to aerially foraging swallows. Overall, our results underscore the importance of protecting and enhancing prairie wetlands and other non-crop habitats in agricultural landscapes, given their disproportionate use and capacity to support breeding swallow and insect populations.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".