MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076960407 · doi:10.1890/11-0020.1

Sex‐based differences in density‐dependent sociality: an experiment with a gregarious ungulate

2012· article· en· W2076960407 on OpenAlexafffund
Eric Vander Wal, Hannah Yip, Philip D. McLoughlin

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersParks CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsSocialityUngulatePopulation densityDensity dependenceEcologyBiologySexual selectionWildlifeHome rangeDemographyPopulationZoologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For animals living in natural or semi-natural settings, empirical data on how sociality changes in response to increasing population density are few, especially with respect to true conspecific density and not group size. However, insight into this line of research may be far-reaching--from understanding density dependence in sexual selection to improving models of disease transmission. Using elk (Cervus elaphus Linnaeus) held in enclosures, we conducted sex-stratified experiments to test how the frequency of dyadic pairings (interaction rate) and their quality (duration) responded to manipulations in exposure to density. Using proximity-logging radio collars we recorded when and for how long individuals shared a space within 1.4 m of each other. As predicted, males increased their interaction rate as density increased. Female interaction rates, however, increased initially as density increased but soon declined to become indistinguishable from rates at low density. Females interacted for longer periods at medium densities, whereas male interaction length clearly decreased as density increased. We highlight a sexually dichotomous, density-dependent response in sociality that has yet to be reported. In addition to furthering our understanding of sociobiology (e.g., implications of time constraints presented by density on dyadic interactions), our results have implications for managing communicable disease in gregarious species of livestock and wildlife.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations35
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207