MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4241928487 · doi:10.1139/z99-255

Reproductive response of Great Tits, <i>Parus major</i>, in a naturally base-poor forest habitat to calcium supplementation

2000· article· en· W4241928487 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Raivo Mänd, Vallo Tilgar, Agu Leivits

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParusBiologyAvian clutch sizeEcologyHabitatHatchingEggshellReproductive successZoologyBroodReproductionAnimal sciencePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent studies have revealed that some forest passerines have difficulty obtaining sufficient calcium (Ca) for their eggshells in heavily acidified areas. However, the effect of Ca limitation on breeding success in non-acidified but naturally base-poor breeding habitats is not yet clear. The issue itself is important, insofar as the cost of egg formation in a certain habitat depends on the availability not only of energy and proteins but also of shell-formation material. We studied the effect of experimental supplementation with extra Ca on the reproductive output of Great Tits, Parus major, breeding in base-poor pine forests in Estonia. Pairs provided with Ca started egg laying earlier than control pairs, and clutch volume was larger in Ca-supplemented nests. There was also a positive effect of Ca supplementation on fledglings' tarsus length and body mass in the year when breeding conditions were the most unfavorable. However, no significant differences were found between the experimental and control groups in hatching success or number of fledglings. We suggest that Ca deficiency is a less limiting factor in naturally base-poor forests than in highly acidified areas, and that birds are able to adjust their breeding efforts to conditions of Ca deficiency. Great Tits, for instance, may respond to Ca shortage by postponing egg laying until their body condition and rate of food intake reach a critical threshold for producing viable eggs and young.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207