Data from: Early singers attend to conspecific but not heterospecific behavioural cues at dawn
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the dawn chorus songbirds initiate singing activities just prior to sunrise. Environmental factors affect the timing of the dawn chorus, but relatively little is known about how behavioural cues influence chorus timing. We assessed whether early playback of conspecific and heterospecific song influenced chorus start times in two early-singing temperate species, hermit thrush (Catharus guttatus) and veery (C. fuscescens). We used arrays of GPS time-synchronized recorders to record the dawn chorus at 30 locations. In each location, thirty minutes prior to natural chorus initiation, we broadcast: (1) an early singing species (hermit thrush or veery), (2) a late singing species (black-throated green warbler or Nashville warbler), (3) a noise control, and (4) also recorded without playback (silent control). Playback treatments were separated by two-three days at each location. Both hermit thrush and veery sang significantly earlier in response to conspecific playback compared to noise or silent controls. Both species also sang earlier in response to conspecific playback compared to the day before or the day after playback. Neither species sang earlier in response to heterospecific playback (regardless of whether the broadcast species was a naturally early or late song initiator) compared to noise or silent controls. Our results support the theory that the dawn chorus is a communication network where individuals attend primarily to conspecific cues; heterospecific song appears to have minimal impacts on the chorus start times of the two early-singing species we investigated.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.027 | 0.008 |
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".