South American sea lions in Peru have a lek‐like mating system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Five years of behavioral observations revealed significant effects of high air temperatures and breeding site topography on the mating system of South American sea lions in Peru. Unlike most polygynous mammals that defend females or fixed territories, male sea lions in Peru maintained positions along the shoreline where females passed each day to thermoregulate, and where most copulations occurred. Sex ratios (1 male per 17 females) and male mating success were extremely skewed (14% of males achieved 50% of the copulations, and 25% of them did not copulate at all). The mass daily movements of females toward the water and cool substrate of the shoreline, along with a highly skewed sex ratio, accentuated the difficulty for males to monopolize and restrict female movements. Females moved freely and chose their mates, unlike in temperate regions of their range where male South American sea lions control groups of females or access to tide pools. Our observations indicate that the South American sea lion in Peru has a lek‐like breeding system. This is a rare alternative to the common male strategies of defending females and resources, and is likely an evolutionary product of their highly skewed sex ratio, protracted breeding season, and the extreme subtropical climate where they breed.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".