Radio transmitters do not influence physiological traits of wintering Grasshopper Sparrows ( Ammodramus savannarum ) in the Chihuahuan Desert of Mexico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radio transmitters are a commonly used method that allows researchers to obtain valuable biological and ecological data from avian populations. However, transmitters might negatively affect survival due to the physiological cost of carrying a device. The negative fitness effects of transmitters are likely to vary interspecifically. Therefore, understanding responses to transmitters by birds can help minimize researcher impact and refine the vital rate estimates derived from these approaches. In this study, we investigated the potential negative impact of radio transmitters on two physiological parameters (heterophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and scaled mass index) on the Grasshopper Sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum) during the non-breeding season in northern Mexico. Specifically, we used two sampling approaches: repeated measures and independent samples. With repeated measures, most radio-tagged individuals maintained similar values in their scaled mass index across the winter, and showed a statically non-significant increase in this variable. In addition, at the population level (independent samples), we observed no significant difference in the use of transmitters, based on the two physiological parameters. Our results for the non-breeding season are consistent with previous studies where researchers have reported no effects of radio transmitters on physiological parameters. In summary, the study provides insights into the lack of a transmitter effect on chronic stress and body mass index in this species, conducted in a challenging environmental stage of the annual cycle and within a grassland priority conservation area.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".