The positive correlation between maternal size and offspring size: fitting pieces of a life‐history puzzle
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The evolution of investment per offspring (I) is often viewed through the lens of the classic theory, in which variation among individuals in a population is not expected. A substantial departure from this prediction arises in the form of correlations between maternal body size and I, which are observed within populations in virtually all taxonomic groups. Based on the generality of this observation, we suggest it is caused by a common underlying mechanism. We pursue a unifying explanation for this pattern by reviewing all theoretical models that attempt to explain it. We assess the generality of the mechanism upon which each model is based, and the extent to which data support its predictions. Two classes of adaptive models are identified: models that assume that the correlation arises from maternal influences on the relationship between I and offspring fitness [w(I)], and those that assume that maternal size influences the relationship between I and maternal fitness [W(I)]. The weight of evidence suggests that maternal influences on w(I) are probably not very general, and even for taxa where maternal influences on w(I) are likely, experiments fail to support model predictions. Models that assume that W(I) varies with maternal size appear to offer more generality, but the current challenge is to identify a specific and general mechanism upon which W(I) varies predictably with maternal size. Recent theory suggests the exciting possibility that a yet unknown mechanism modifies the offspring size-number trade-off function in a manner that is predictable with respect to maternal size, such that W(I) varies with size. We identify two promising avenues of inquiry. First, the trade-off might be modified by energetic costs that are associated with the initiation of reproduction ('overhead costs') and that scale with I, and future work could investigate what specific overhead costs are generally associated with reproduction and whether these costs scale with I. Second, the trade-off might be modified by virtue of condition-dependent offspring provisioning coupled with metabolic factors, and future work could investigate the proximate cause of, and generality of, condition-dependent offspring provisioning. Finally, drawing on the existing literature, we suggest that maternal size per se is not causatively related to variation in I, and the mechanism involved in the correlation is instead linked to maternal nutritional status or maternal condition, which is usually correlated with maternal size. Using manipulative experiments to elucidate why females with high nutritional status typically produce large offspring might help explain what specific mechanism underlies the maternal-size correlation.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,015 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».