Is it risky to be a father? Survival assessment depending on sex and parental status in the water bug Abedus breviceps using multistate modelling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We carried out a capture–recapture multistate modelling approach to estimate survival and recapture probabilities and transition rates between parental and nonparental status in an adult wild population of the water bug Abedus breviceps Stål, 1862 (Hemiptera: Belostomatidae). The global model included the following parameters: sex, male parental status (brooding or not), and transience (individual’s permanent movement from the site after first capture). Models were selected by means of the information-theory paradigm. The best supported model shows no difference in survival between males and females regardless of male parental status. Thus, the frequently assumed cost of parental care in terms of survival is not supported by our data. Furthermore, during the study, male expected adult life span in the wild was lower than the time needed to brood a batch of eggs from oviposition to hatching. We discuss potential consequences of such a short male expected adult life span in terms of parental behaviour decision rules related to fitness maximization.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".