MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015293947 · doi:10.1098/rsbl.2006.0615

Persistent maternal effects on juvenile survival in North American red squirrels

2007· article· en· W2015293947 on OpenAlexaff
Tricia D Kerr, Stan Boutin, Jalene M. LaMontagne, Andrew G. McAdam, Murray M. Humphries

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology Letters · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOffspringBiologyJuvenileBiological dispersalReproductionMaternal effectReproductive successEcologyZoologyDemographyPregnancyPopulationGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maternal effects can have lasting fitness consequences for offspring, but these effects are often difficult to disentangle from associated responses in offspring traits. We studied persistent maternal effects on offspring survival in North American red squirrels (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) by manipulating maternal nutrition without altering the post-emergent nutritional environment experienced by offspring. This was accomplished by providing supplemental food to reproductive females over winter and during reproduction, but removing the supplemental food from the system prior to juvenile emergence. We then monitored juvenile dispersal, settlement and survival from birth to 1 year of age. Juveniles from supplemented mothers experienced persistent and magnifying survival advantages over juveniles from control mothers long after supplemental food was removed. These maternal effects on survival persisted, despite no observable effect on traits normally associated with high offspring quality, such as body size, dispersal distance or territory quality. However, supplemented mothers did provide their juveniles an early start by breeding an average of 18 days earlier than control mothers, which may explain the persistent survival advantages their juveniles experienced.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations70
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology LettersSame topicAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207