Nutritional consequences of breeding away from riparian habitats in Bank Swallows: new evidence from multiple endogenous markers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Bank Swallow (Riparia riparia), a threatened species in Canada, breeds primarily in banks at lakeshores and rivers and in artificial (typically inland) aggregate mining pits. Inland pits may be ecological traps for this species, but relative dietary trade-offs between these two nesting habitats have not been investigated. The availability of aquatic emergent insects at lakeshores may have associated nutritional benefits for growing nestlings due to increased omega-3 fatty acids (FAs) in prey. We compared the diets of juvenile swallows from lakeshore and inland pit sites using assays of stable isotope values (δ13C, δ15N, δ2H) of feathers, faecal DNA metabarcoding and blood plasma FAs. Colony proximity to Lake Erie influenced the use of aquatic versus terrestrial insects by Bank Swallow adults and juveniles. Feather δ2H was particularly useful as a tracer of aquatic emergent versus terrestrial prey, and inland juveniles had feathers enriched in 2H, reflective of diets composed of fewer aquatic emergent insects. DNA metabarcoding of juvenile and adult faecal material indicated that lakeshore birds consumed more aquatic-emergent chironomids than inland birds. Lakeshore juveniles had elevated plasma omega-3 eicosapentaenoic acid levels compared with inland pit-breeding birds. We discuss the need to consider ‘nutritional landscapes’ and the importance of this concept in conservation of declining species and 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".