Supplementary tables and analyses.Data used in the analyses. from Strategic adjustment of parental care in tree swallows: life-history trade-offs and the role of glucocorticoids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Life-history theory predicts that optimal strategies of parental investment will depend on ecological and social factors, such as current brood value and offspring need. Parental care strategies are also likely to be mediated in part by the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis and glucocorticoid hormones. Here, we present an experiment in tree swallows (Tachycineta bicolor), a biparental songbird with wide geographical distribution, asking whether parental care is strategically adjusted in response to signals of offspring need and brood value and if so, whether glucocorticoids are involved in these adjustments. Using an automated playback system, we carried out playbacks of nestling begging calls specifically to females in two populations differing in their brood value: a northern population in Ontario, Canada (relatively higher brood value) and a southern population in North Carolina, USA (relatively lower brood value). We quantified female offspring provisioning rates before and during playbacks and plasma corticosterone levels (cort) once during late incubation and once immediately after playbacks. Females in both populations increased feeding rates temporarily during the first 2 h of playback but the increase was not sustained for the entire duration of playback (6 h). Cort levels from samples at the end of the playback did not differ between control females and females that received playbacks. However, females that had higher increases in cort between the incubation and nestling period had greater fledging success. These results suggest that females are able to strategically respond to offspring need, although the role of glucocorticoids in this strategic adjustment remains unclear.
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 | 0.003 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.643 | 0.120 |
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".