MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223986168 · doi:10.1111/1365-2656.13705

The relative influence of cross‐seasonal and local weather effects on the breeding success of a migratory songbird

2022· article· en· W4223986168 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Devin R. de Zwaan, Anna Drake, Alaine F. Camfield, Elizabeth C. MacDonald, Kathy Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Ecology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaWestern Forest ProductsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSociety of Canadian OrnithologistsUniversity of British ColumbiaEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAmerican Ornithological SocietyPolar Knowledge Canada
KeywordsPhenologySeasonal breederNest (protein structural motif)BiologySongbirdAvian clutch sizeEcologyOffspringReproductive successPopulationReproductionDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In seasonal environments, fluctuating early-season weather conditions and short breeding windows limit reproductive opportunities such that breeding earlier or later than the optimum may be particularly costly. Given the risk of early-season energy limitations, time- and energy-based carry-over effects stemming from environmental conditions across the annual cycle may have pronounced consequences for breeding phenology and fitness. Generally, when and where environmental conditions are most influential are poorly understood, limiting our ability to predict the future of climate-sensitive populations. For an alpine-breeding, migratory population of horned lark Eremophila alpestris in northern British Columbia, Canada (54.8°N), we assessed how weather conditions across the annual cycle influenced clutch initiation date and offspring development. We also addressed how cross-seasonal effects on breeding parameters combine to influence reproductive fitness. With 12 years of breeding data and 3 years of migration data, we used a sliding window approach to identify points during the annual cycle when weather events most influenced breeding phenology and offspring development. Consequences for breeding success were assessed using nest survival simulations. Average clutch initiation date varied up to 11 days among years but did not advance from 2003 to 2019. Warmer temperatures at stopover and breeding sites advanced clutch initiation, but winter conditions had no effect. Sub-zero stopover temperatures carried over to prolong offspring development independent of clutch initiation date, potentially indicating energy-based carry-over effects acting on parental investment. Nest survival decreased with both later clutch initiation and prolonged offspring development such that females nesting earlier and fledging offspring at a younger age were up to 45% more likely to reproduce successfully. We demonstrate that stronger carry-over effects originated from environmental conditions closer to the breeding site in time and space, as well as the potential for energy-based mechanisms to link pre-breeding conditions to reproductive fitness. We also highlight the importance of extended stopovers for songbirds breeding in seasonal environments, particularly given that climatic conditions are becoming increasingly decoupled across stages of the annual cycle. Understanding the cross-seasonal mechanisms shaping breeding decisions in stochastic environments allows for more accurate predictions of population-level responses to climate change.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations25
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal EcologySame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207