Data for "Predator type and relative risk affects the repeatability of nest defense in a songbird"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interindividual differences in nest defense towards a single predator type have been shown to be repeatable in multiple species, supporting the presence of personality. Here, we assessed if the nest defense of female northern house wrens (Troglodytes aedon) was repeatable across different types of predators, which is predicted by personality and largely untested. Over three years, we placed a decoy of a common nest predator, the eastern rat snake (Pantherophis alleghaniensis), on top of nest boxes and measured female behavior. Each season, we also presented a second stimulus of varying threat level, including an eastern chipmunk decoy (Tamias striatus), a taxidermied Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii), and a novel object of unknown threat. We measured repeatability between each pair of threats and compared the population-level response to the snake across years. Nest defense was significantly repeatable between the snake and chipmunk, which presented similar risks. It was also repeatable between the snake and novel object despite the population-level response to the object being significantly weaker. In contrast, nest defense was not repeatable between the snake and the hawk, which posed a significant threat to adult survival that may have disrupted the consistency of the female response. Finally, the average, population-level response to the snake did not detectably differ among years, indicating stability in this behavior despite high turnover in breeding adults. These results suggest the presence of personality in nest defense, but more research is needed to evaluate the effect of high-risk predators on the repeatability of this behavior. Additional data analyzed in this study can be found at DOI: 10.17632/zjb5ynz5n4.4 Please see our BioRxiv Preprint (and eventual publication) for more information on the specific details of our protocol and statistical analysis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".