MATING DENSITY AND THE STRENGTH OF SEXUAL SELECTION AGAINST DELETERIOUS ALLELES IN<i>DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER</i>
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deleterious alleles constantly enter populations via mutation. Their presence reduces mean fitness and may threaten population persistence. It has been suggested that sexual selection may be an efficient way by which deleterious alleles are removed from populations but there is little direct experimental evidence. Because of its potential role in mutational meltdowns, there is particular interest in whether the strength of sexual selection changes with density. For each of eight visible markers in Drosophila melanogaster we have compared the strength of sexual selection at two densities. We find evidence of strong sexual selection against most but not all of these alleles. There is no evidence that sexual selection tends to be stronger (or weaker) at high density relative to low density. In addition, we also measure the effects of these mutations on two key parameters relevant to population productivity--juvenile viability and female fecundity. In most cases, sexual selection is as strong or stronger than these other forms of 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.
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) | 0.000 | 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 it