Two girls for every boy: The effects of group size and composition on the reproductive success of male and female white‐faced capuchins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many factors have been hypothesized to affect the size and adult sex ratios of primate groups and these, in turn, have been argued to influence birth rates. Using park-wide census data collected on a population of capuchins over a 25-year period, we examined whether group size and adult sex ratio affect the per capita reproductive success of male and female white-faced capuchins (Cebus capucinus) in Santa Rosa National Park, Costa Rica. We found that the reproductive success of females (measured as the observed minus the expected ratio of immatures to adult females in the group) decreased with increasing group size, whereas that of males was independent of group size. The proportion of adult males residing in groups had significant, yet contrasting effects on males and females. Male reproductive success was negatively associated with the proportion of males residing in groups whereas female reproductive success increased with the proportion of males. The latter finding supports the intersexual conflict hypothesis, which suggests that a conflict of interest occurs between males and females over adult sex ratios. The effects of group size and composition on the reproductive success of capuchins, a male-dispersed omnivorous species, are similar to those reported for howlers, a bisexually-dispersed folivorous species. One common factor between these taxa is that groups with low ratios of males to females are at greater risk of takeovers and resultant infanticide. Our results suggest that regardless of dietary preference and dispersal pattern, the threat of infanticide can constrain primate group size and composition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".