How protandry and protogyny affect female mating failure: a spatial population model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Population growth and persistence depend on the collective ability of individuals to find mates in both space and time. When individuals are reproductively mature for only a portion of a population's breeding season, reproductive asynchrony can cause mating failure and a temporal A llee effect, which is exacerbated by spatial constraints in isolated populations. However, the effect of phenological variation by sex (protandry, protogyny) in spatiotemporal mate finding is not well understood. Here, we examine the interacting roles of sex‐specific and population‐wide individual asynchrony on female matelessness in spatially isolated populations. By incorporating sex‐specific phenology into a two‐sex reaction‐diffusion system, we explore female matelessness as a function of phenology, movement behavior, and patch size. Although individual asynchrony may lead to female mating failure in small and isolated populations, we find that moderate protandry reduces female mating failure across a variety of scenarios. We go on to examine model behavior for a case study based on the bagworm, T hyridopteryx ephemeraeformis H aworth ( L epidoptera: P sychidae), where many populations exhibit pronounced protogyny. Overall, we find a consistent benefit of moderate protandry, which may mitigate female matelessness for many populations.
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".