Life-history implications of migratory Lesser Sandhill Cranes replacing adjacent blocks of primaries synchronously
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Using the patterns of fault bars in their primaries, we studied the mode of primary replacement in non-molting Lesser Sandhill Cranes (Antigone c. canadensis) salvaged from hunters in southwestern Saskatchewan. About 80% of their primaries are used for 2 yr and 20% for 3 yr. Primaries are replaced during the breeding season and are lost in synchronous blocks representing about half the primaries, suggesting that most adults probably can fly weakly during flight feather replacement. Cranes are large, aggressive birds, and this interesting, and undescribed mode of flight feather replacement seems adapted to the ability of adult cranes to defend their precocial chicks from predators. Strikingly, juvenile Sandhill Cranes showed no fault marks in their primaries, suggesting that their parents’ ability to protect them shields them from the fright of predator attacks, which, in most birds, causes fault bars to be more prevalent and strongly expressed in juveniles than adults. Adults show interesting variation in the number of primaries replaced annually, which seems likely related to whether or not they are caring for chicks. Further, single primaries may or may not be replaced preferentially, suggesting sensitivity to feather function. Evaluating these observations must await field studies of molting adults.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".