Reproductive investment patterns, sperm characteristics, and seminal plasma physiology in alternative reproductive tactics of Chinook salmon (<i>Oncorhynchus tshawytscha</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although alternative reproductive tactics (ARTs) are common across a range of taxa, little is known about whether the different tactics have adapted to sperm competition risk. Chinook salmon, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha, have two ARTs: large males that participate in dominance-based hierarchies for access to spawning females, known as hooknoses, and small males that attempt to sneak fertilizations during spawning events from peripheral positions, known as jacks. Jacks continually face sperm competition risk because they always spawn in the presence of another male, whereas hooknoses face relatively low sperm competition risk because other males are not always present during spawning events. Based on the sneak-guard model of sperm competition this asymmetry in sperm competition risk predicts that jacks ought to invest significantly more into sperm-related traits important for sperm competition success relative to hooknoses. In the present study we report on reproductive investment patterns, sperm characteristics, and seminal plasma physiology of males that exhibit ARTs in Chinook salmon. We found that jacks invest significantly more of their somatic tissue into gonads compared with hooknoses. Sperm velocity also varied significantly between the ARTs, with jacks having significantly faster sperm than hooknoses. No significant differences in seminal plasma physiology metrics related to sperm quality were detected between the ARTs. We interpret these sperm investment patterns in light of the sneak-guard model of sperm competition that is based on differences in sperm competition risk and alternative investment possibilities among ARTs.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".