Mating failure of female <i>Parnassius smintheus</i> butterflies: a component but not a demographic Allee effect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Female mating success affects the ecology, evolution, and conservation of species. From a population dynamic perspective, female mating failure occurring due to low population density potentially translates into negative population growth, resulting in population extinction. Despite the implications, there have been surprisingly few comprehensive studies of both the causes and the population level effects of female mating failure for insects. Herein, we examined the mating success of female Parnassius smintheus Doubleday (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae) butterflies and its effects on population growth. Using mark‐recapture data amassed from 17 interconnected populations over 12 years, we assessed whether yearly female mating success varied with local population density, and whether population growth varied with mating success. We found that there was increased female mating failure at low population density – a component Allee effect. However, this effect did not result in a demographic Allee effect. We found that population growth was greatest at lowest densities and that there was no relationship between female mating success and population growth. These results along with a growing number of studies indicate that demographic Allee effects are much less common than component effects, and they may be relatively uncommon for insects in nature.
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 | 0.000 | 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".