Sperm quality influences male fertilization success in walleye (<i>Sander vitreus</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined how variation in sperm quality influences a male's success at fertilizing ova (male fertilization success) in a wild population of walleye (Sander vitreus). To do this, we conducted controlled fertilization trials using milt and eggs (ova) from wild-spawning fish and measured male fertilization success (percentage of ova fertilized) by examining eggs after 24 h of incubation. We found that both the number of sperm and sperm swimming speed (at 10 s after activation) were significantly related to fertilization success. There was, with respect to fertilization success, a relatively large return on male investment in the number of sperm, but this return diminished as the percentage of ova fertilized increased above 50%. This is in agreement with theoretical predictions based on external fertilization dynamics. When the number of sperm used in the experimental trials was kept constant, variation in sperm swimming speed (at 10 s after activation) explained approximately 90% of the variation in a male's fertilization success. These findings demonstrate that the variation in sperm quality found in wild spawning populations has the potential to dramatically influence male reproductive success.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".