Breeding season forest fragment size does not create negative carry-over for adult Wood Thrushes on fall migration timing or apparent annual survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although carry-over effects related to wintering habitat quality are known to influence population dynamics of migratory songbirds, the presence of breeding season carry-over is understudied in full annual cycle models. To test whether forest fragment size on the breeding grounds can impose negative carry-over effects on a migratory songbird, we fitted adult Wood Thrush (Hylocichla mustelina) with 1-year coded radio-tags in forest fragments ranging from 16 to 499 ha in southwestern Ontario during the 2016–2019 breeding seasons and utilized automated telemetry via the Motus Wildlife Tracking System to record fall migration timing and returns the following spring (apparent annual survival). To examine short-term effects of fragment size on breeding females, during the 2018 and 2019 breeding seasons, we collected blood samples during incubation to measure corticosterone levels and tracked complete reproductive success and nest timing. We found that Wood Thrushes breeding in small forest fragments were not subject to strong negative effects on body condition (mass, corticosterone), reproductive success, or timing of the last nest of the season. We found that the onset of fall migration departure was not delayed for birds nesting in small fragments, and that apparent annual survival was not linked to breeding fragment size. This suggests that habitat differences linked to fragment size were not strong enough to trigger the kinds of negative carry-over effects (delayed migration, lower reproductive success) that have been documented in other species as a result of poor wintering-ground habitat quality. The strength of breeding fragment size-induced seasonal carry-over remains a critical gap in full annual cycle models for other declining migratory songbirds. Our findings suggest that while the importance of preserving large forested areas is often prioritized in conservation projects, small forest fragments can also have high conservation value.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".