Heritability of female extra-pair paternity rate in song sparrows (<i>Melospiza melodia</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The forces driving the evolution of extra-pair reproduction in socially monogamous animals remain widely debated and unresolved. One key hypothesis is that female extra-pair reproduction evolves through indirect genetic benefits, reflecting increased additive genetic value of extra-pair offspring. Such evolution requires that a female's propensity to produce offspring that are sired by an extra-pair male is heritable. However, additive genetic variance and heritability in female extra-pair paternity (EPP) rate have not been quantified, precluding accurate estimation of the force of indirect selection. Sixteen years of comprehensive paternity and pedigree data from socially monogamous but genetically polygynandrous song sparrows (Melospiza melodia) showed significant additive genetic variance and heritability in the proportion of a female's offspring that was sired by an extra-pair male, constituting major components of the genetic architecture required for extra-pair reproduction to evolve through indirect additive genetic benefits. However, estimated heritabilities were moderately small (0.12 and 0.18 on the observed and underlying latent scales, respectively). The force of selection on extra-pair reproduction through indirect additive genetic benefits may consequently be relatively weak. However, the additive genetic variance and non-zero heritability observed in female EPP rate allow for multiple further genetic mechanisms to drive and constrain mating system evolution.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".