Data from: Survival is negatively related to basal metabolic rate in tropical Andean birds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Life history theory postulates that physiological traits, such as energy metabolism, can be understood in terms of allocation trade-offs between self-maintenance and reproduction over an organism’s lifespan, and data show that metabolic intensity and survival vary inversely with latitude, with tropical birds exhibiting a ‘slow’ pace of life relative to temperature species. However, tropical regions harbor strong environmental gradients of their own, and it remains to be shown whether similar life history trade-offs between metabolism and longevity are reflected among tropical birds of the same latitude. 2. We estimated apparent annual survival in 37 species of tropical passerine birds along an elevational gradient (400–3000 m) in Peru to test whether variation in survival was influenced by basal metabolic rate (BMR; estimated at the same sites), elevation or both factors. We used path analysis to test our prediction that survival would decline as BMR increased, while accounting for the potential direct effects of elevation on survival due to differences in predation pressure or environmental conditions as well as potential indirect effects of elevation on BMR via temperature and the costs of thermoregulation. 3. Higher BMR in tropical passerine birds predicted lower apparent survival, regardless of the elevation at which species occurred. In addition, elevation had a direct negative effect on apparent survival, perhaps due to harsher abiotic conditions, low site fidelity, or both at high elevations. 4. We provide evidence of a link between metabolic rate and longevity previously undescribed in populations of free-living birds. Our results illustrate that tropical montane species may be characterized by a unique suite of traits in their pace of life, in which BMR does not differ from lowland birds, but survival does.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".