Individual foraging behaviour indicates resource limitation: an experiment with mallard ducklings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The linkage between individual behaviour and population processes has recently been emphasized. Within this framework we studied the effect of resource limitation on the behaviour of mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) ducklings in boreal lakes. One group of 12 human-imprinted ducklings (4-16 days old) were taken to 11 "rich" lakes, i.e., with a relatively high concentration of total phosphorus in the water, and the other group of 12 ducklings to 11 "poor" lakes to forage for a period of 6 h. During this, a time budget study lasting 5 min was done of each of the 12 ducklings. In the rich lakes, ducklings fed significantly more and moved less than in the poor ones. This difference was particularly striking in above-surface feeding. Variation in foraging performance was associated with change in body mass of the ducklings: the less distance the ducklings moved and the more they fed above water, the more they gained mass. Earlier results had suggested that at least some of the boreal wetlands that lack duck broods year after year (70% of the total in one study) do so because they do not harbour enough food. Hence, it is possible that mallard populations are resource-limited at the brood stage during the breeding season.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".