CONDITION DEPENDENCE OF MALE LIFE SPAN AND CALLING EFFORT IN A FIELD CRICKET
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexually selected traits are thought to impose survival costs on showy males. Recent empirical work found a negative relationship between male display and survival in a field cricket species (Orthoptera, Gryllidae, Gryllinae) where there is no evidence of a mating bias toward older males. In most species, however, male survival and ornamentation are positively correlated, and older males often have a mating success advantage over younger males. These findings suggest that male quality and survival are positively correlated, but more tests of this hypothesis are needed. We measured the condition dependence of male survival and calling effort in another grylline, Gryllus pennsylvanicus, where older males have previously been shown to have greater mating success. We varied condition by manipulating diet, and measured male life span and calling effort to assess the relative condition dependence of these traits. High- and medium-condition males survived longer than low-condition males, and high-condition males called more than medium- and low-condition males. Differences in calling effort among the condition treatments were not apparent early in life, but emerged as males aged. We discuss possible explanations for the differences between our study and contrasting results such as the previous grylline work.
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 | 0.001 | 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".