Male aggression during mating: evidence for sexual coercion in a female dominant primate?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article we document male sexual coercion of a Lemur catta female on St. Catherines Island (SCI), USA. Data presented in this paper were collected on one free-ranging L. catta group during October-November 2002 using all-occurrences sampling for agonism and reproductive behavior. We observed a male forcefully attempting to mate with a year-old estrous female. Despite the fact that we observed this female to present to the male during her estrus, throughout the episode the male employed the use of force, and achieved penile intromission on at least one occasion while the female struggled and resisted. We interpret his behavior as sexual coercion. As measured by sexual presents, the female appeared to more strongly prefer two other males as mates, yet each of these males gained fewer mounts and less cumulative time spent in mounts than the coercive male. The coercive male was one of two group males with the lowest observed mating success, suggesting that coercion might be a strategy used by males who are not highly sexually preferred. Females undergo early sexual maturation at this site owing to provisioning, and can therefore enter estrus before fully attaining dominance over males. As such, these data suggest that one consequence of provisioning a wild L. catta population (or of maintaining L. catta in captivity) may be that young females can be the targets of sexual coercion if they reach sexual maturity before fully achieving social dominance over males. In conclusion, male sexual coercion can occur in L. catta despite the female dominance characteristic of this species, and can constrain the mating behavior of females.
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) | 0.001 | 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".