“Failure to launch”: is there a reproductive cost to males living at home?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Differential reproductive success commonly reflects variations in reproductive physiology, behavior, and morphology. In some species, competition among males results in the evolution of alternative reproductive tactics that confer a fitness advantage relating to social status, density, or myriad other factors. In the Cape ground squirrel (Xerus inauris), a species that is highly competitive but lacks typical mammalian aspects of intrasexual competition (e.g., territoriality and aggression), 2 alternative reproductive tactics occur relating to dispersal. While physiological and behavioral differences have been demonstrated between dispersed males and males that delay dispersal, we used microsatellite markers to quantify variations in reproductive success between tactics. We found that dispersed males are in better body condition with larger home ranges likely allowing greater encounter frequencies with estrous females. However, we found no difference in copulation frequency between tactics, and the decision to delay dispersal does not preclude reproduction. Over 70% of males did not sire any offspring, yet the average number of offspring sired was equal between tactics. Thus, all males are equally likely of copulating, but paternity is strongly skewed toward a few males regardless of tactic. Natal philopatry may be a condition-dependent tactic that does not reduce reproductive success.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".