† Indicates co-first author, * Indicates undergraduate co-author
14. Smiley, K.O., Lipshutz, S.E., Kimmitt, A.A., DeVries, M.S., Cain, K.E., George, E.M., and Covino, K.M. Beyond a biased binary: A perspective on the misconceptions, challenges, and implications of studying females in avian endocrinology. Accepted in Frontiers in Physiology.
13. Kimmitt, A.A., Becker, D., Friedline, S., Gerlach, N.M., Rosvall, K.A., and Ketterson, E.D. Plasticity in female timing may explain earlier breeding in a North American songbird. Accepted in Journal of Animal Ecology.
12. Earl, A.D.†, Kimmitt, A.A.†, and Yorzinksi, J.L. 2022. Circulating hormones and dominance status predict female behavior during courtship in a lekking species. Accepted in Integrative and Comparative Biology.
11. Terry, R.*, Ramirez, L.*, Carrera, C.*, Kimmitt, A.A., Delmore, K., Goulart, A. 2021. A Zugunruhe Data Collection System Using Passive Infrared Sensors. PURSUE: Undergraduate Research Journal, 4(1).
10. Singh, D., Reed, S.M.*, Kimmitt, A.A., Alford, K.A. and Ketterson, E.D. 2021. Breeding at higher latitude as measured by stable isotope is associated with higher photoperiod threshold and delayed reproductive development in a songbird. Hormones and Behavior, 128, pp.104907.
9. Justen, H.†, Kimmitt, A.A.†, and Delmore, K.E. 2021. Estimating hybridization rates in the wild: easier said than done? Evolution, 75(8), 2137-2144.
8. Kimmitt, A.A, 2020. Females as the gatekeepers to seasonal breeding: what we can learn by studying reproductive mechanisms in both sexes. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 60(3), pp.703-711
7. Orr, T.J., Burns, M., Hawkes, K., Holekamp, K.E., Hook, K.A., Josefson, C.C., Kimmitt, A.A., Lewis, K, Lipshutz, S.E., Lynch, K.S., Sirot, L.K., Stadtmauer, D.J., Staub, N.L., Wolfner, M.F. and Hayssen, V. 2020. It takes two to tango: including a female perspective in reproductive biology. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 60(3), pp.796-813
6. Kimmitt, A.A., Webb, A.L.*, Greives, T.J. and Ketterson, E.D., 2020. Migrant and resident female songbirds differ in gonadal response to upstream stimulation during seasonal sympatry. General and Comparative Endocrinology, 293, pp.113469.
5. Kimmitt, A.A., Sinkiewicz, D.M. and Ketterson, E.D., 2020. Seasonally sympatric songbirds that differ in migratory strategy also differ in neuroendocrine measures. General and comparative endocrinology, 285, pp.113250.
4. Kimmitt, A.A., Hardman, J.W.*, Stricker, C.A. and Ketterson, E.D., 2019. Migratory strategy explains differences in timing of female reproductive development in seasonally sympatric songbirds. Functional Ecology, 33(9), pp.1651-1662.
3. Kimmitt, A.A., Dietz, S.L.*, Reichard, D.G., and Ketterson, E.D., 2018. Male courtship preference during seasonal sympatry may reinforce population divergence. Ecology and Evolution 8(23), pp.11833-11841.
2. Reichard, D.G., Kimmitt, A.A., Welklin, J.F. and Ketterson, E.D., 2017. Condition-and context-dependent factors are related to courtship behavior of paired and unpaired males in a socially monogamous songbird. The Auk, 134(3), pp. 575-586.
1. O’Dell, D.A., Carlo, M.A., Kimmitt, A., Bikowski, E., Morris, K.R. and Dolby, A., 2014. A comparison of techniques measuring stress in birds. Virginia Journal of Science, 65(3), pp.3.