MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415890246 · doi:10.1080/01584197.2025.2577991

Food availability constrains investment by male Spotted Bowerbirds ( <i>Chlamydera maculata)</i> in their bowers

2025· article· en· W4415890246 on OpenAlexaff
Jess Isden, Caroline Dingle, Carmen Kayan, Joah R. Madden

Bibliographic record

VenueEmu - Austral Ornithology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsCapilano University
FundersDirectorate for Biological SciencesUniversity of Exeter
KeywordsInvestment (military)EctothermParental investmentForaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Male bowerbirds (Ptilonorhynchidae) construct elaborate bowers decorated with objects from their environment to attract mates. These structures require time and energy to build and maintain that could otherwise be spent foraging, suggesting food availability may influence bower attendance and display quality. In a wild population of Spotted Bowerbirds (Chlamydera maculata), bower attendance was lower during a drought – when fruit was scarce – compared to seasons of average rainfall. Monthly attendance closely tracked rainfall that occurred 2 months prior. Experimental food provisioning during drought increased bower attendance and decoration numbers but did not affect structural elements of the bower. In non-drought seasons, natural food abundance correlated with more decorations but did not influence structure or attendance. Males spending less time at their bowers tended to have more perishable decorations. These results suggest that food availability limits male display investment primarily during droughts. Under normal conditions, local food abundance has little effect on bower quality or male behaviour, indicating that environmental stress drives resource-based constraints on sexual display.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.245
Teacher spread0.232 · 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.

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmu - Austral OrnithologySame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207