When Less Is Best: Female Brown-Headed Cowbirds Prefer Less Intense Male Displays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual selection theory predicts that females should prefer males with the most intense courtship displays. However, wing-spread song displays that male brown-headed cowbirds (Molothrus ater) direct at females are generally less intense than versions of this display that are directed at other males. Because male-directed displays are used in aggressive signaling, we hypothesized that females should prefer lower intensity performances of this display. To test this hypothesis, we played audiovisual recordings showing the same males performing both high intensity male-directed and low intensity female-directed displays to females (N = 8) and recorded the females' copulation solicitation display (CSD) responses. All eight females responded strongly to both categories of playbacks but were more sexually stimulated by the low intensity female-directed displays. Because each pair of high and low intensity playback videos had the exact same audio track, the divergent responses of females must have been based on differences in the visual content of the displays shown in the videos. Preferences female cowbirds show in acoustic CSD studies are correlated with mate choice in field and captivity studies and this is also likely to be true for preferences elucidated by playback of audiovisual displays. Female preferences for low intensity female-directed displays may explain why male cowbirds rarely use high intensity displays when signaling to females. Repetitive high intensity displays may demonstrate a male's current condition and explain why these displays are used in male-male interactions which can escalate into physical fights in which males in poorer condition could be injured or killed. This is the first study in songbirds to use audiovisual playbacks to assess how female sexual behavior varies in response to variation in a male visual display.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".