MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105542475 · doi:10.1093/beheco/arn089

A mechanism for cryptic female choice in chinook salmon

2008· article· en· W2105542475 on OpenAlexaff
Patrice Rosengrave, Neil J. Gemmell, Victoria Metcalf, Katherine P. McBride, Robert Montgomerie

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Ecology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologySpermChinook windFemale sperm storageHuman fertilizationSperm competitionReproductionSperm motilityAndrologyZoologyOncorhynchusEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>AnatomyGeneticsFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Female mate choice after copulation or spawning is cryptic when a female differentially influences the fertilization success of sperm from different males. We tested whether ovarian fluid could act as a potential mechanism of cryptic female choice (CFC) in chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) by comparing how ovarian fluid from each of 7 females affected the sperm behavior of 11 different males. Using computer-assisted sperm analysis, we measured sperm velocity, motility, longevity, and linearity from the ejaculates of each male activated in the ovarian fluid from each female. Mean sperm swimming speed, path trajectory, and longevity differed significantly among males, and within males depended on the female's ovarian fluid in which it was activated. Most important, the pattern of within-male variation in these traits also varied significantly among males in response to different females' ovarian fluids. As sperm velocity is known to be a prime determinant of fertilization success in externally fertilizing fishes. This finding suggests that variation in the composition of female ovarian fluid may be a mechanism for CFC, whereby females differentially enhance the swimming speed of sperm from different males. Thus, female ovarian fluid can alter relative male fertilization success when there is intense sperm competition, as there is in this and other group spawning fish species. Copyright 2008, Oxford University Press.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations126
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral EcologySame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207