Limited evidence that asymmetries of multiple Whiskered Auklet (<i>Aethia pygmaea</i>) feather ornaments could serve a display function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Elaborate avian feather ornaments have proven to be enigmatic because their function is often unclear, even though they are used in courtship and social displays. Male and female Whiskered Auklets Aethia pygmaea display on their faces four elaborate feather ornaments that serve both courtship and mechanosensory functions: three bilateral pairs of white facial plume tracts (superorbital, suborbital and auricular) and a slender black forehead crest, each consisting of several filoplumes. We studied left–right symmetry in the three antenna‐like bilateral white head plumes of 721 wild‐caught marked individuals (162 of known sex, 94 of known age that were 1–16 years old) during 1992–2009. Auricular and suborbital plumes were slightly more asymmetric in subadults (1‐year‐olds) than in adults (≥ 2 years old) but the opposite was true for superorbital plumes. Ornament asymmetries were not sexually dimorphic, nor were they significantly related to individual body condition, body size or age, except that superorbital plume asymmetry decreased significantly with tarsus length. Relative asymmetry (scaled for ornament size) of all three ornaments was negatively correlated with plume size, as predicted by some sexual selection models, but variation in asymmetries was large and differences between left (L) and right (R) sides in most birds were probably too small to be detected visually. Marginal mean absolute asymmetries (|L–R|) of super‐ and suborbital plumes were correlated with ocean climate during the preceding year when the birds would have been moulting, suggesting that fluctuating asymmetry at the population level might be a useful index of environmental stress in this seabird. The spectacular bilaterally expressed facial plumes displayed by Whiskered Auklets provide an interesting test case for questions about asymmetry in sexually and naturally selected traits.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".