Data from: Seabirds vary responses to supplemental food under dynamic natural prey availability and feeding aggregation composition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While foraging, a predator can feed solitarily or in a group. The net energy gain of joining a group is predicted to vary with prey patch quality, species-specific prey capture behavior and the size and species composition of the predator group. In coastal Newfoundland, Canada, capelin (Mallotus villosus), a key forage fish, migrates inshore to spawn during the summer, resulting in a dramatic shift in prey availability. During July-August, 2015-2017, we examined the numerical and behavioral responses of procellarid (Great Shearwater Ardenna gravis, Sooty Shearwater A. grisea, Northern Fulmar Fulmarus glacialis) and gull species (Herring Gull Larus argentatus, Great Black-backed Gull L. marinus) to fish offal under varying capelin availability as well as flock size and composition using an at-sea experiment on the northeast Newfoundland coast. The experiment consisted of providing a offal every 30 s (10-min experimental period), along with 10-min control periods before and after. We recorded the species-specific number of birds on the water, the number of birds simultaneously attempting to capture offal, and the number of successful attempts (‘foraging success’). The number of birds on the water was lower during high capelin availability for all species, except for Northern Fulmar. The number of conspecifics simultaneously attempting increased with the number of conspecifics on the water, but plateaued at different numbers (4-17) for each species. The species-specific proportion of successful attempts (i.e. ‘foraging success’) varied with flock size and composition (i.e. number of conspecifics, heterospecifics, species). Foraging success of Herring Gulls and fulmars were moderately affected by flock size and composition, suggesting that they may be dominant competitors. Findings suggest that seabirds rely more heavily on supplemental food sources, such as fisheries discards and offal, when natural prey availability declines, potentially resulting in a higher risk of by-catch during fisheries activities as forage fish stocks decline.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.015 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".