MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sex‐ and age‐specific survival of the highly dimorphic Alpine ibex: evidence for a conservative life‐history tactic

2007· article· en· W2054586796 on OpenAlexafffund
Carole Toïgo, Jean‐Michel Gaillard, Marco Festa‐Bianchet, E. Soto Largo, J. Michallet, Daniel Maillard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Ecology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSexual dimorphismLife historyBiologyLife history theoryZoologyDemographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1. Age-specific survival of 215 males and 117 females of the highly sexually dimorphic Alpine ibex Capra ibex (L.) was assessed from a 21-year capture-mark-recapture (CMR) programme (1983-2004). The study covered two contrasted periods of population performance (high performance from 1983 to 1997 vs. low performance from 1998 onwards). 2. Based on current life-history theories for sexually dimorphic species, we expected that survival should decrease with age in both sexes, female survival should be buffered against environmental variations, male survival should decrease during the low performance period, and adult survival should be lower in males than females during the low performance period. 3. Survival of both sexes was strongly affected by age, with the four age classes (yearling, prime-aged adults of 2-8 years of age, old adults of 8-13 years of age, and senescent adults from 13 years of age onwards) generally reported for large herbivores. 4. Survival of females at all ages, and of yearling and prime-aged males, was buffered against environmental variations and was the same during periods of high and low population performance. The survival of old males decreased in years of low population performance. 5. All marked yearlings (32 females, 56 males) survived to age 2. Survival of prime-aged females (0.996 +/- 0.011) was higher than for other large herbivores, but similarly to other large herbivore species, it declined slowly and regularly with increasing age afterwards. Male survival was 5-15% higher each year than that of males of other large herbivores. Males enjoyed very high survival when prime-aged (0.981 +/- 0.009) and as old adults (high-performance period: 0.965 +/- 0.028, low-performance period: 0.847 +/- 0.032). 6. The very high survival of males, coupled with their prolonged mass gain, suggests a highly conservative reproductive tactic. Male ibex differ from similar-sized herbivores by showing a nearly indeterminate growth in horn size and body mass. By surviving to an advanced age, males may enjoy high reproductive success because of their large size.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations95
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal EcologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207