MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413253177 · doi:10.3389/fbirs.2025.1613273

Quantitative analysis of the flight calls and trills of Evening Grosbeaks (Coccothraustes vespertinus)

2025· article· en· W4413253177 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
William Kirsch, Caleb T. Centanni, Matthew A. Young, Thomas P. Hahn, W. Douglas Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Bird Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyDiscriminant function analysisRange (aeronautics)StatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diversity within species can be masked by minor differences in external appearance but revealed by group differences in vocal characteristics such as flight calls of Fringillid finches. These flight calls vary among infraspecific groups within a species. In Evening Grosbeaks ( Coccothraustes vespertinus ), existence of five distinct call types have been hypothesized to occur, yet the variation within and between the different call types has yet to be quantitatively evaluated. We measured characteristics of flight calls and another common call form, trills, across the North American range of the Evening Grosbeak. We analyzed our own recordings as well as those contributed to digital sound archives to map, measure and, with the aid of cluster and discriminant function analyses, classify flight calls and trills into types. Flight calls of types 1, 2, 3, and 4 were readily distinguishable from each other but trills were less distinctive. A fifth set of calls that group together in cluster analyses includes birds from the southwestern United States, Mexico and, surprisingly, from Alberta and Saskatchewan, Canada. However, flight calls from central Canada and Mexico/Arizona still showed several statistically significant differences, so we hypothesize existence of six flight call types. Our interpretation may be influenced by currently small sample sizes and lack of summer samples from Mexico. Here, we refer to the Mexico/Arizona birds as type 5 and the Alberta and Saskatchewan birds as type 6 but recognize that additional information could provide stronger evaluation of these categories. Except for some type 3, 4 and 6 flight calls that were very similar according to the spectrographic properties included in our analyses, most Evening Grosbeak flight calls are diagnosable to type with a high degree of confidence. We encourage additional collection of recordings across North America, especially from central Canada, Arizona, and Mexico. Future studies can utilize sound recordings to identify infraspecific call type groups, map their seasonal movements and investigate variation in call structure through time to facilitate progress toward unraveling the evolutionary importance of such cryptic diversity.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.312
Threshold uncertainty score0.292

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Bird ScienceSame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207