MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7154428488

Body Size, Nest Initiation Date, and Egg Production in Ruddy Ducks

2024· article· W7154428488 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lori A. Boon, C. Davison Ankney

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida) · 2024
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaterfowlNest (protein structural motif)AnatidaeEggshellBody weightAvian clutch sizeFeather
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Female Ruddy Ducks (Oxyura jamaicensis) produce the largest eggs, relative to body size, of all waterfowl (Lack 1968).Energy in one of their eggs is equivalent to 322% of daily basal metabolic rate (A1isauskas and Ankney 1992), the highest of all Anatidae.Furthermore, Ruddy Ducks lay one egg per day (Siegfried 1976).Female Ruddy Ducks rely on both endogenous and exogenous nutrients for egg production.On average, 49% of the lipid, 41% of the protein, and 16% of the minerals required for egg production are supplied by stored reserves in Ruddy Ducks (Alisauskas and Ankney 1994).These authors also reported that the size of lipid, mineral, and protein reserves was positively related to body size in their sample of breeding females.Thus, we predicted that larger female Ruddy Ducks would lay larger clutches.Also, because birds in good condition (i.e. with larger reserves) may initiate nesting earlier than those in poorer condition (Reynolds 1972, Scott and Birkhead 1983), we also predicted that larger females are able to attain good condition and would initiate nesting earlier than would smaller females.Within species, variation in egg mass among females is high in waterfowl (Ankney and Alisauskas 1992), but few studies have attempted to determine the source of this variation.In Lesser Snow Geese (Chen c. caerulescens), about 60% of among-female variation in egg mass is heritable (Lessells et al. 1989).Such an estimate may be inflated if larger females lay larger eggs and if body size also is heritable (see Alisauskas and Ankney 1992).Indeed, egg mass is positively related to body size in Lesser Snow Geese (Newell 1988) and Northern Pintails (Anas acuta; Flint and Grand 1996).Thus, we also investigated whether egg size of female Ruddy Ducks was related to body size.Methods.--Thisstudy was conducted in 1994 in southwestern Manitoba near Minnedosa (50ø11'N, 90ø42'W).The rolling knob-and-kettle landscape is scattered with wetlands ranging in size from 10 m 2 to 4 ha (Evans et al. 1952, Dzubin 1961).Emergent vegetation in the region includes cattail (Typha spp.),

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida)→Same topicAvian ecology and behavior→French-language works237,207→