MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6892252796 · doi:10.5061/dryad.7wm37pw06

Birds are better at regulating heat loss through their legs than their bills: Implications for body shape evolution in response to climate

2023· dataset· en· W6892252796 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDRYAD · 2023
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersAustralian Research Council
KeywordsPlumageAppendageThermoregulationBeakEctothermHeat flowFeather

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Endotherms use their appendages – such as legs, tails, ears and bills – for thermoregulation by controlling blood flow to near-surface blood vessels, conserving heat when it is cold, and dissipating heat in hot conditions. Larger appendages allow greater heat dissipation, and appendage sizes vary latitudinally according to Allen’s Rule. However, little is known about the relative importance of different appendages for thermoregulation. We investigate physiological control of heat loss via bird bills and legs using infra-red thermography of wild birds. Our results demonstrate that birds are less able to regulate heat loss via their bills than their legs. In cold conditions, birds lower their leg surface temperature to below that of their plumage surface, retaining heat at their core. In warm conditions, birds increase their leg surface temperature to above that of their plumage surface, expelling heat. In contrast, bill surface temperature remains ~2˚C warmer than the plumage surface, indicating consistent heat loss under almost all conditions. Poorer physiological control of heat loss via bird bills likely entails stronger selection for shorter bills in cold climates. This could explain why bird bills show stronger latitudinal size clines than bird legs, with implications for predicting shape-shifting responses to climate change.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.231
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.009

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDRYADFrench-language works237,207