Milt quality, parasites, and immune function in dominant and subordinate Arctic charr
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Within a species, different males may display different mating strategies. For example, some males may be selected to invest in attractiveness and mate guarding, whereas others are selected for increased sperm production and sneaky breeding. In systems with a hierarchical structure, dominant males are expected to adopt mate-guarding behaviour and subordinate males sneaky-breeding behaviour. In this study, we kept wild-caught and sexually ripe male Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) in size-matched pairs and determined social rank from the number of aggressive encounters. After 4 days, subordinate males showed symptoms of stress, with higher blood glucose and erythrocyte levels than dominant males. There were no differences between dominant and subordinate males in parasite intensities or immune activity, measured as levels of granulocytes and lymphocytes in blood. Although subordinate males had smaller testes than dominant males, they still had a higher density of sperm cells and higher sperm numbers relative to the size of their testes. These results can be explained as indicating adaptation of subordinate males for reproduction in an unfavourable role, always exposed to sperm competition and out of synchrony with females' egg release. Our results suggest that rapid changes in social rank may affect ejaculate production.
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) | 0.001 | 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".