MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sexual Selection on Accessory Glands, Genitalia and Protarsal Pads in the Whirligig Beetle <i>Dineutus nigrior</i> Roberts (Coleoptera: Gyrinidae)

2007· article· en· W2022546594 on OpenAlexaff
Evan R. Fairn, Albrecht I. Schulte‐Hostedde, Yves Alarie

Bibliographic record

VenueEthology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAedeagusAllometrySexual selectionMatingBiologyTraitZoologyAntagonistic CoevolutionAnatomyEvolutionary biologySexual conflictEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sexual selection is a potent force in the evolution of morphology in sexually reproducing species. When large size in a trait is favored by sexual selection the trait often exhibits positive allometry. Mating behavior in whirligig beetles consists of males attempting to grasp reluctant females using enlarged protarsi (protarsal pads). Here we use allometry and a mating experiment to investigate sexual selection pressures on accessory glands, intromittant genitalia (aedeagus), and protarsal pads in males of the whirligig beetle Dineutus nigrior Roberts. Accessory gland size exhibited positive allometry and males with larger accessory glands were more likely to copulate suggesting that larger size in this trait is favored by sexual selection. Males with larger accessory glands attempted to copulate more often but did not exhibit fewer failed mating attempts before copulating. This suggests that the increased probability of mating in males with large accessory glands is due to higher mating attempt frequency and not to increased ability to overcome female resistance. The length of the aedeagus exhibited negative allometry and males with a longer aedeagus did not have increased mating success. This is consistent with stabilizing selection favoring an intermediate size in this trait. The allometric slope of the protarsal pad did not differ from isometry and males with larger protarsal pads did not have increased mating success. This suggests that larger protarsal pads are not favored by sexual selection.

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)0.001
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 score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations17
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthologySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207