Sexual reproduction in <i>Daphnia pulex</i> (Crustacea: Cladocera): observations on male mating behaviour and avoidance of inbreeding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Mating behaviour in Daphnia appears to rely on random contact between males and sexual females rather than diffusible pheromones. Males may be able to discriminate sexually receptive females from females in other developmental stages and increase their mating efficiency. Males may also use chemical signals to avoid mating with females from the same clone and avoid the severe inbreeding depression that has been documented for intraclonal mating. The present study used experiments to test for the avoidance of intraclonal mating and assess male mating efficiency in D. pulex . 2. Three clones were examined for the avoidance of intraclonal mating by providing males with an opportunity to mate with females of the same or two different clones. The proportion of intraclonal matings did not differ from the proportion of interclonal matings, suggesting that D. pulex males do not use kin discrimination to avoid mating with females from the same clone. 3. The proportion of mated females decreased with increasing numbers and density of sexual females when exposed to a single male. This observation suggests that a male spends more time pursuing and copulating with sexually receptive females than non‐receptive females and there is insufficient time to mate with all sexual females. The decrease in proportion of females mated could also be the result of sperm depletion in the male. Sperm depletion is unlikely to occur in nature because sexually receptive females are much rarer than in the experimental conditions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".