The Influence of Maternal Quality on Brood Sex Allocation in the Small Carpenter Bee, <i>Ceratina calcarata</i>
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the twig‐nesting carpenter bee, Ceratina calcarata , body size is an important component of maternal quality, smaller mothers producing significantly fewer and smaller offspring than larger mothers. As mothers precisely control the sex and size of each offspring, smaller mothers might compensate by preferentially allocating their investment towards sons. We investigated whether variation in maternal quality leads to variation in sex allocation patterns . At the population level, the numerical sex ratio was 57% male‐biased (1.31 M/F), but the investment between the sexes was balanced (1.02 M/F), because females are 38% larger than males (1.28 F/M). Maternal body size explained both sex allocation pattern and size variation among offspring: larger mothers invested more in individual progeny and produced more female offspring than smaller mothers. Maternal investment in offspring of both sexes decreased throughout the season, probably as a result of increasing maternal wear and age. The exception to this pattern was the curious production of dwarf females in the first two brood cell positions. We suggest that the sex ratio distribution reflects the maternal body size distribution and a constraint on small mothers to produce small broods. This leads to male‐biased allocation by small females, to which large mothers respond by biasing their allocation towards daughters.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it