Parent‐Offspring Conflict in the Evolution of Vertebrate Reproductive Mode
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose and evaluate the hypothesis that parent-offspring conflict over the degree of maternal investment has been one of the main selective factors in the evolution of vertebrate reproductive mode. This hypothesis is supported by data showing that the assumptions of parent-offspring conflict theory are met for relevant taxa; the high number of independent origins of viviparity, matrotrophy (direct maternal-fetal nutrient transfer), and hemochorial placentation (direct fetal access to the maternal bloodstream); the extreme diversity in physiological and morphological aspects of viviparity and placentation, which usually cannot be ascribed adaptive significance in terms of ecological factors; and divergent and convergent patterns in the diversification of placental structure, function, and developmental genetics. This hypothesis is also supported by data demonstrating that embryos and fetuses actively manipulate their interaction with the mother, thereby garnishing increased maternal resources. Our results indicate that selection may favor adaptations of the mother, the fetus, or both in traits related to reproductive mode and that integration of physiological and morphological data with evolutionary ecological data will be required to understand the adaptive significance of interspecific variation in viviparity, matrotrophy, and placentation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".