Effect of melatonin supplementation upon parental care and nestling growth in arctic‐breeding songbirds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arctic-breeding birds exhibit around-the-clock activity, and these activity cycles are postulated to maximize reproductive success during the short breeding season characteristic of high-latitude regions. Two closely related species of arctic-breeding songbirds, Lapland longspurs (Calcarius lapponicus; ground-nesting) and snow buntings (Plectrophenax nivalis; cavity-nesting) exhibit extended activity cycles throughout the polar day (71° N) except for 4-5 h of daily quiescence. Ground-nesting Lapland longspurs experience higher levels of nest predation than cavity-nesting snow buntings, and this difference is reflected in elevated nest vigilance in male longspurs compared with snow buntings. In this study, we examined the effect of melatonin supplementation upon male parental care, corresponding measures of nestling growth, and ability to reduce activity (and increase sleep). A pharmacological dose of melatonin in captive snow buntings dampened the amplitude of activity rhythms over the polar day with no detectable phase-shifting compared with control-implanted birds. Melatonin treatment reduced nest visits and overall time spent on the nest by male snow buntings compared with controls. There was no significant increase in time spent by female snow buntings on the nest to compensate for this, and there was no significant effect on offspring growth rates. There were no effects of melatonin supplementation on longspur adults or offspring, suggesting behavioral insensitivity to exogenous melatonin treatment. These differences in sensitivity underscore the importance of nest defense in ground-nesting longspurs compared with cavity-nesting snow buntings, which participate minimally in nest defense.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".