MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125512154 · doi:10.1093/beheco/arh080

Pattern of sperm transfer in redback spiders: implications for sperm competition and male sacrifice

2004· article· en· W2125512154 on OpenAlexafffund
Lindsay S. E. Snow, Maydianne C. B. Andrade

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Ecology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologySperm competitionSpermCompetition (biology)SacrificeZoologyEcologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many sperm competition studies have identified copulation duration as an important predictor of paternity. This result is often interpreted as a sperm transfer effect--it is assumed that sperm transfer is limited by copulation duration. Here we test the assumption of duration-dependent sperm transfer in the Australian redback spider, Latrodectus hasselti, in which a correlation between copulation duration and paternity has been implicated in the evolution of a rare male self-sacrifice behavior. Male redbacks facilitate sexual cannibalism by females during copulation. Sexual cannibalism is apparently adaptive for redback males, in part because it results in longer copulations (25 versus 11 min.), and copulation duration is positively correlated with paternity. We assessed sperm transfer in normal copulations and in copulations that we terminated at 5, 10, or 20 min. Our results show that the paternity advantage of sexual cannibalism is not owing to time-dependent sperm transfer, as redback males transfer the majority of their sperm within the first 5 min of copulation. This suggests that the link between copulation duration and paternity may instead be owing to cryptic female choice or the transfer of nongametic ejaculatory substances. Results further indicate that the act of cannibalism itself might play a role in mediating sperm transfer. This study highlights the importance of understanding mechanisms of sperm transfer when attempting to interpret the outcome of sperm competition studies. Copyright 2004.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations104
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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