MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255549144 · doi:10.1525/auk.2009.08024

Multi-Year Seasonal Sex-Allocation Patterns in Red-winged Blackbirds (<i>Agelaius phoeniceus</i>)

2009· article· en· W4255549144 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Patrick J. Weatherhead

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Auk · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignQueen's University
KeywordsSex ratioSeasonal breederFledgeBiologyEcologySex allocationDemographyPredationPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A previous study reported that climate-mediated increases in the length of the breeding season produced increasingly female-biased fledging sex ratios in Red-winged Blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus). Using those same data plus one additional year (11 years in total), I found that this phenomenon was not a result of greater production of females early and late in the season, contrary to what had been proposed. Instead, seasonal sex-allocation patterns interacted with season length. Early and midseason sex ratios became more female-biased as breeding seasons became longer, whereas late-season sex ratios tended to vary in the opposite manner, albeit weakly. Thus, the discrepancy between sex ratios late in the season and those earlier (early plus midseason) was a strong function of season length. Because fledging sex ratios did not vary with nestling mortality, these patterns appear to be a consequence of nonrandom sex-allocation rather than sex-biased survival. It is unclear whether these sex-allocation patterns are adaptive. Because the climatic factor (the North Atlantic Oscillation) associated with longer breeding seasons is also associated with higher winter mortality, however, it is possible that female Red-winged Blackbirds change how they allocate sex in response to changes in the breeding sex ratio. If climate change continues to alter these patterns, documenting how individuals and populations respond will be informative, from both basic and applied perspectives.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.245
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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe AukSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207