Chemical fingerprints indicate group membership in a highly social communal breeding bird
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gregarious species must distinguish group members from non-group members. Olfaction is important for group recognition in mammals but rarely studied in birds, despite birds using olfaction in social contexts from species discrimination to kin recognition. Olfactory-based recognition requires that groups have a signature odour, so we tested for preen oil and feather chemical similarity among group-living smooth-billed anis (Crotophaga ani). Physiology affects body chemistry, so we also tested for an effect of egg-laying competition, as a proxy for reproductive status, on female chemical similarity. Finally, the fermentation hypothesis for chemical recognition posits that host-associated microbes drive host odour, so we tested for covariation between ani chemicals and microbiota. Group members were more chemically similar than non-group members, regardless of body region, demonstrating that gregarious bird species can have group chemical signatures. Females in groups with less egg-laying competition had more similar preen oil, but not feather, chemicals, suggesting preen oil conveys information about reproductive status. There was no overall covariation between chemicals and microbes; instead, subsets of microbes could mediate olfactory cues in birds. Preen oil and feather chemicals showed little overlap, suggesting they convey different information. These findings will guide experimental work on olfaction in gregarious 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 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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.020 |
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".