Extrapair paternity and mate choice in a chickadee hybrid zone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dynamics of hybrid zones are likely to be influenced greatly by patterns of mate choice, including “cryptic” choice mediated through extrapair copulations. To understand changes in hybrid zones over time and space, a detailed examination of mating patterns and correlates is needed. We studied the role of extrapair fertilizations (EPFs) in the breeding biology of hybridizing black-capped and Carolina chickadees in southeastern Pennsylvania over 4 years, using microsatellite DNA markers. We detected extrapair offspring (EPO) in 56% of 90 broods examined; these accounted for at least 26% of 477 offspring. Chickadees do not appear to use EPFs to reduce costs of heterospecific pairing: EPFs were no more likely to occur in genetically dissimilar (heterospecific) social pairs than in pairs where social mates were genetically similar. However, females paired with black-capped–like males were more likely to have EPO. Females that acquired EPFs did not obtain these from males genetically similar to themselves; instead, all females, regardless of their genotype or that of their social mate, tended to prefer Carolina-like males as extrapair partners. There was no relationship between the presence of EPO and hatching or fledging success. High rates of extrapair paternity and apparent female preference for Carolina-like males suggest that mate choice is an important influence in ongoing northward movement of this hybrid zone.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".