Covariation between morphological traits and ant-following behavior in Neotropical birds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Some species rely on others to obtain part, or in extreme cases, all of their food. For example, ant-following birds exploit insects that are disrupted by swarms of army ants. Such behavioral specialization is often linked to the evolution of morphological traits that enhance resource exploitation. In this study, I investigated whether morphological traits covary with ant-following behavior. I predicted that traits than enhance competitive ability, like a heavier weight and signals of dominance, should be more prevalent in species that rely more on ants to obtain food. Other morphological traits were also expected to diverge reflecting the unique lifestyle of ant-following birds. I focused on Neotropical families that include obligate ant-following species, as well as others that follow ants frequently, occasionally, or not at all—thus providing a gradient of ant-following behavior. Using a phylogenetic framework that incorporated primary lifestyle and foraging behavior, I identified several morphological changes in ant-following species. Compared to non-following species, obligate species were generally heavier with a significantly reduced wing area due to shorter wings and secondaries. They also had shorter tails and narrower, shorter bills. Additionally, bare periorbital areas, which are thought to act as signals in competitive interactions, were more common among obligate species than in other groups. Facultative ant-following species exhibited intermediate phenotypes and species that rarely follow ant swarms showed no significant morphological differences from those that never do. Overall, the findings support the hypothesis that morphological traits covaried with ant-following behavior in Neotropical birds.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".