Preliminary analysis of reproductive success in a large mammal with alternative mating tactics, the Northern chamois,<i>Rupicapra rupicapra</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In polygynous mating systems, reproductive skew depends on the ability of males to monopolize females, which in turn may promote the development of contrasting traits in the two sexes. Although dominant individuals normally enjoy a higher reproductive success (RS) than subordinates, the use of genetic markers has shown that behavioural observations of male mating success may not provide reliable clues of RS. We report the preliminary results of the first DNA-based paternity analysis on the Northern chamois (Rupicapra rupicapra), a scarcely dimorphic mountain ungulate described as highly polygynous, in relation to mating tactic and age. Because of sampling difficulties, the success in parentage assignment was low, and the interpretation of results requires caution. Territorial males had a greater RS than nonterritorial ones but they were unable to monopolize mating events. Age had a weak effect on paternity outcome but only males ≥ 6 years showed siring success. Although future studies are needed to assess the opportunity for sexual selection in male chamois, the concurrence of limited sexual size dimorphism, compensatory growth, unbiased sex-specific survival, RS of alternative mating tactics and, possibly, long breeding tenure, may hint at the adoption of a conservative mating strategy in this species.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".