Sex‐based differences in the adaptive value of social behavior contrasted against morphology and environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The adaptive nature of sociality has long been a central question in ecology and evolution. However, the relative importance of social behavior for fitness, compared to morphology and environment, remains largely unknown. We assessed the importance of sociality for fitness (lamb production and survival) in a population of mark6d bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) over 16 years (n = 1022 sheep-years). We constructed social networks from observations (n = 38,350) of group membership (n = 3150 groups). We then tested whether consistent individual differences in social behavior (centrality) exist and evaluated their relative importance compared to factors known to affect fitness: mass, age, parental effects, and population density. Sheep exhibited consistent individual differences in social centrality. Controlling for maternal carryover effects and age, the positive effect of centrality in a social network on adult female lamb production and survival was equal or greater than the effect of body mass or population density. Social centrality had less effect on male survival and no effect on adult male lamb production or lamb survival. Through its effect on lamb production and survival, sociality in fission-fusion animal societies may ultimately influence population dynamics equally or more than morphological or environmental effects.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".