MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395114442 · doi:10.1676/23-00015

Song overlapping in territorial defense and other contexts by the Hermit Thrush ( <i>Catharus guttatus</i> )

2024· article· en· W4395114442 on OpenAlexaff
Kendra DeMerchant, Jillian A. Jessulat, Sean P. Roach

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Wilson Journal of Ornithology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThrushGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Songbirds, which rely heavily upon acoustic communication, employ a variety of strategies to reduce the degree to which their songs are masked by other sounds within the environment. One such strategy is to make active adjustments to song timing to avoid temporally overlapping other environmental sounds. While playback studies in many different songbird species have demonstrated that territorial males avoid overlapping conspecific songs in that context, there is comparatively little known about how such behavior varies across contexts. For example, there is relatively little information on avoidance of overlapping in naturalistic interactions (e.g., countersinging) among conspecific singers; likewise, few studies have assessed the degree to which males avoid overlapping heterospecific songs. Songbird researchers have also explored possible communicative functions of song overlapping, most notably the idea that overlapping conveys information related to aggression. The objectives of the present study were to compare song overlapping across contexts and to assess the relationship between song overlapping and physical responses to conspecific playback in the Hermit Thrush (Catharus guttatus). Degree of song overlapping in response to conspecific (n = 29) and heterospecific playback (n = 31), as well as during naturally occurring countersinging (n = 21 pairs), was compared to chance levels. Avoidance of overlapping occurred in all 3 contexts, although to a lesser degree in response to heterospecific playback. Comparison of physical responses to song overlapping during conspecific playback revealed no association, aligning with recent studies in other species indicating that song overlapping is not an aggressive signal. Instead, the avoidance of song overlapping appears to be an important tool for decreasing the risk of acoustic interference posed by both conspecific and heterospecific songs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Wilson Journal of OrnithologySame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207