Hamilton and Zuk meet heterozygosity? Song repertoire size indicates inbreeding and immunity in song sparrows (<i>Melospiza melodia</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hamilton and Zuk's influential hypothesis of parasite-mediated sexual selection proposes that exaggerated secondary sexual ornaments indicate a male's addictive genetic immunity to parasites. However, genetic correlated of ornaments and immunity have rarely been explicitly identified. Evidence supporting Hamilton and Zuk's hypothesis has instead been gathered by looking for positive phenotypic correlations between ornamentation and immunity; such correlations are assumed to reflect causal, addictive relationships between these traits. We show that in a song sparrows, Melospiza melodia, male's song repertoire size, a secondary sexual trait, increased with his cell-mediated immune response (CMI) to an experimental challenge. However, this phenotypic correlation could be explained because both repertoire size and CMI declined with a male's inbreeding level. Repertoire size therefore primarily indicated a male's relative heterozygosity, a non-addictive genetic predictor of immunity. Caution may therefore be required when interpreting phenotypic correlations as support for Hamilton and Zuk's addictive model of sexual selection. However, our results suggest that female song sparrows choosing with large repertoires would on average acquire more outbred and therefore more heterozygous mates. Such genetic dominance effects on ornamentation are likely to influence evolutionary trajectories of female choice, and should be explicitly incorporated into genetic models of sexual selection.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".