MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409244705 · doi:10.5751/ace-02813-200113

Tracing aquatic resource contributions to Tree and Barn Swallow nestling diets across a cropland and wetland gradient

2025· article· en· W4409244705 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Ana Maria Diaz Bohorquez, Christy A. Morrissey, Keith A. Hobson

Bibliographic record

VenueAvian Conservation and Ecology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWetlandBarnEcologyPredationBarn-owlResource (disambiguation)GeographyEnvironmental gradientTree (set theory)BiologyEnvironmental scienceHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nutritional quality of nestling diets, influenced by parental prey selection, determines offspring health and development. In agricultural landscapes, nestling diets may be impacted by changes in prey availability from agricultural intensification. In 2020 and 2021, we compared landscape-level effects on nestling prey resources in two sympatric species of breeding aerial insectivores, Tree Swallow (Tachycineta bicolor) and Barn Swallow (Hirundo rustica). Our study was conducted across an agricultural crop and wetland gradient in Saskatchewan, Canada. Using hydrogen stable isotope analyses (δ²H) of nestling feathers, as an indicator of differential diet composition of terrestrial vs. aquatic-emergent insects, we hypothesized that Tree Swallows, as aquatic insect specialists, would have lower feather δ²H values indicative of more aquatic diets. We predicted that increasing annual-row crop and wetland cover around nests would differentially impact each species with Tree Swallows being more sensitive to landscape differences given known reliance on wetland-derived prey. Wetland waters and select aquatic and terrestrial insects showed high variation presumably due to seasonal stochastic evaporation requiring greater sampling effort. However, evidence of differential use of aquatic resources was consistently found between the two swallow species and between wet versus dry years. Lower average Tree Swallow nestling feather δ²H values suggested their diet was more reliant on aquatic-emergent prey, unrelated to the land use around the nest (at 500–2000 m). In contrast, Barn Swallows had higher average feather δ²H, which decreased with greater standing water cover in proximity of the nest (< 500 m), suggesting more terrestrial diets with opportunistic use of aquatic-emergent prey resources. For both species, we found no effect of crop cover extent on the isotopic indicator of prey source. These results contribute to the growing body of evidence that multiple species of aerial insectivores rely on aquatic insect resources regardless of local agricultural land use. Our results highlight the importance of conservation of small, interspersed wetlands, especially in intensive cropland-dominated landscapes, to benefit multiple species of aerial insectivores.

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)0.000
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 score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAvian Conservation and EcologySame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207