Ejaculate investment in a promiscuous rodent, Peromyscus maniculatus: effects of population density and social role
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Questions: How does average male investment in ejaculates vary with changing population density (and thus with the risk of sperm competition) in a promiscuous species? Do individual male investment strategies vary with population density? Data studied: Total testicular mass, somatic mass and annual population density for wild-caught male deer mice, Peromyscus maniculatus, collected by snap-trapping over a 23-year period in Algonquin Provincial Park, Ontario, Canada. Search methods: We analysed the relation between mean testicular mass and mouse population densities across years. To investigate individual investment patterns, we compared the relation between total testicular mass and somatic mass among males for years differing in population density. Conclusions: Average investment in the testes was positively correlated with annual population density. An individual’s investment in testes depended on both the abundance of rival males and on relative body size, a trait associated with social rank.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".