Mate Guarding in Male Dall's Porpoises (<i>Phocoenoides dalli</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Mate guarding, whereby a male closely attends and defends a fertile female from extra‐pair matings, is one mating tactic males of many species use to protect their paternity. Although female defense occurs in many species of terrestrial mammal, comparable examples among cetaceans are largely absent, potentially as a result of the wide dispersion and mobility of females and their prey. Here, we investigate whether the close association of individual male Dall's porpoises with individual females during the breeding season is consistent with mate guarding. As mate guarding is predicted to be costly, and in other taxa is often associated with a reduction in foraging efficiency, we also examine whether males trade‐off this activity with time at depth. Males maintained longer associations and closer distances with female partners than with male ones. They also surfaced in greater synchrony with, and more often approached, their female partners than male ones. In contrast to males with male partners, males paired with females engaged in agonistic interactions with other adult males, and infrequently affiliated with extra‐pair individuals. These data suggest males are actively attempting to maintain their associations with females, while also acting to reduce female extra‐pair copulations and increase their own paternity. Guarding males also undertook shorter dives than non‐guarding males, suggesting that they trade‐off time at depth with guarding. Such a trade‐off is likely to involve a reduction in foraging opportunities, due to a decrease in time spent at foraging depth. Mate guarding in this species may be facilitated by the relatively smaller size and decreased mobility of newly calved, estrous females, particularly if females also benefit from guarding.
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) | 0.002 | 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".