MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408274820 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-93101-6

Depressed nestling growth during exposure to smoke from distant wildfires

2025· article· en· W4408274820 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cara A. Krieg

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmokeBiologyGeographyEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental healthEcologyDemographyMedicineMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human and animal populations increasingly encounter smoke pollution as climate change enhances the frequency and intensity of wildfires. Most work on smoke effects in animals has studied populations close to fires, populations experiencing small, prescribed burns, or animals in the lab. In June of 2023, smoke from distant Canadian wildfires quickly elevated particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) pollution in a wild house wren ( Troglodytes aedon ) population for three days before returning to baseline levels. Compared to previous years, nestlings experiencing three days of elevated PM 2.5 within the first 6 days of life weighed less on days 6 and 10 after hatching and had shorter tarsometatarsus bones, a sign of smaller skeletal size. In contrast, nestlings that hatched before or after this event did not differ in size from previous years. Although sublethal, these effects may have important consequences for survival and reproduction. As wildfire activity increases, more wildlife populations are at risk of smoke-related fitness consequences, even those distant from the blaze.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→