Sociality, Mate Choice, and Timing of Mating in American Bison (<i>Bison bison</i>): Effects of Large Males
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We studied group size, composition, and mating activities in American bison ( Bison bison ) during rut on the Delta Junction Bison Range in interior Alaska, USA, in 1996 and 1997. Our purpose was to determine the effects of large males (≥5 yr old) on mating and associated activities. Groups with large males were larger than those containing smaller males. Most groups of bison were mixed‐sex (90%), but large males occurred in only one‐half of all groups. Moreover, females in groups with large males were more likely to copulate than those in groups with smaller males, indicating a female preference for large males. Nevertheless, our results are consistent with large males seeking out adult females for mating rather than vice versa. Mating peaked in mid‐August during both the study years and was highly synchronous. Scent marking was coincident with mating, an outcome consistent with a hypothesis of such behavior triggering ovulation. Scent marking by large male bison occurred in both male–male and male–female contexts, but was associated most often with sexual activities. No differences in group size occurred with changes in weather or among vegetation types occupied by bison. Group size of bison, however, was larger with increasing distance from the forest edge, which likely was a response to predation risk in this predator‐rich environment.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".