Endogenous biomarkers reveal diet partitioning among three sympatric species of swallows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Since the early 1990s, aerial insectivorous birds have shown serious population declines in North America, but it is not clear if factors common to all species within this guild account for these declines. Among sympatric swallows, population trends differ, and this may be due to differences in ecology operating throughout the annual cycle. Although these species all feed on aerial insects, prey taxa can differ tremendously in their “aeroecology” and use by swallows. We examined the potential for dietary differences among three species of swallows, Barn Swallow (Hirundo rustica), Cliff Swallow (Petrochelidon pyrrhonota), and Tree Swallow (Tachycineta bicolor), breeding sympatrically in southern Ontario, Canada. Potential interspecific differences in nestling diet were examined using two endogenous biomarkers, DNA barcoding of nestling feces and stable isotope analysis (δ 2H, δ 13C, δ 15N) of nestling feathers. We found evidence for differences in dietary sources of provisioned young where Barn Swallows provisioned more terrestrial-based prey, Cliff Swallows provisioned an intermediate diet, and Tree Swallows the most aquatic-emergent insect diet. We suggest this information may help to identify potential factors contributing to differential declines of aerial insectivores operating on the breeding grounds, including diet quality.
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) | 0.005 | 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".