Longevity and Fecundity Records in the Tree Swallow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Longevity and fecundity records in the Tree Swallow Dagid ].T. Huss•11 ccording to J.H. Kennard (Bird-Banding 46:55-73, 1975), 9 years is the oldest age recorded for a Tree Swallow (Iridoprocne bicolor).The original record of L.B. Chapman (Bird-Banding 26:45-70, 1955) shows that this female laid 53 eggs in 10 clutches in 9 breeding seasons.Recently P. Dring (North American Bird Bander 7:25, 1982) reported another female Tree Swallow which lived to be at least 9 years old and laid 54 eggs in 9 seasons.Here I report an 11-year-old female Tree Swallow which laid at least 55 eggs in her lifetime.On 17 June 1970, G.L. Holroyd placed band no.75-48658 on a female Tree Swallow attending a nest in one of Long Point Bird Observatory's nest boxes at the eastern end of Long Point, Ontario (42 ø 33'N, 80 ø 04'W).Aged as a yearling (=SY, second year, in banding terminology) in 1970, based on the predominantly brown plumage of the upper parts, she was retrapped as a breeder in full blue plumage in all years 1971-80 except 1974 (Table 1), but was not found in 1981 or 1982.(Few adult swallows were trapped in 1974, so she may have bred at Long Point that year also).In the summer of 1980, 75-48658 was 11 years old.Breeding statistics for 75-48658 are given in Table 1.Excluding 1980 (see below), dates of first egg ranged from 22-30 May; clutch size was 7 in the first 2 years, then became consistently 6 until 1979 when it was 5.In 9 breeding seasons 75-48658 laid 55 eggs.Unfortunately clutch size data from 1973 were lost in a fire, but 75-48658 did breed that year and it is extremely unlikely that she laid fewer than 4 eggs, so a lifetime fecundity of at least 59 eggs can be safely assumed.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".