Body mass and individual fitness in female ungulates: bigger is not always better
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: ObservationalConsensus signal: Observational
- Genre
- Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.003
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.999
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
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
Abstract
In female vertebrates, differences in fitness often correspond to differences in phenotypic quality, suggesting that larger females have greater fitness. Variation in individual fitness can result from variation in life span and/or variation in yearly reproductive success, but no study has yet assessed the relationships between the components of fitness and phenotypic quality while controlling for life span. We tried to fill this gap using data from long-term monitoring (23 years) of marked roe deer and bighorn sheep, two ungulates with very different life histories. In both species, we found a strong positive relationship between an adult female's mass and her probability of reaching old age: over the long term, bigger is indeed better for ungulate females. On the other hand, we found no evidence in either species that heavier females had higher fitness when differences in life span were accounted for: over the short term, bigger is not necessarily better. Our results indicate that, while broad differences in phenotypic quality affect individual fitness, when differences in life span are accounted for phenotypic quality has no residual effect on fitness. Therefore, within a given range of phenotypic quality, bigger is not always better, for reasons which may differ between species.
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.
The record
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences
- Topic
- Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Field
- Environmental Science
- Canadian institutions
- Alberta Environment and Protected AreasUniversité de Sherbrooke
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- UngulateBiologyLife spanReproductive successDemographyTraitEcologyGenetic FitnessAffect (linguistics)ZoologyEvolutionary biologyHabitatPopulationBiological evolutionPsychologyGeneticsCommunication
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes