EVOLUTION OF INDUCED OVULATION IN NORTH AMERICAN CARNIVORES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We tested the hypothesis that induced ovulation is adaptive in North American carnivores by providing a mechanism to overcome the risk of unsuccessful mating in solitary species living in seasonal environments and a method for females to evaluate male quality via sexual selection inside the reproductive tract. We obtained published data on North American carnivores and determined from their distribution a coefficient of seasonality and primary productivity. Using traditional statistics and comparative methods, we determined that induced ovulators lived in more seasonal environments apparently not influenced by energy. No statistical differences in behavioral traits existed between induced and noninduced ovulators, but trends in data were consistent with our predictions, with induced ovulators tending to have larger home ranges and longer estrous periods. Mating systems also differed between the groups: induced ovulators were characterized by mostly (93%) multimale mating systems, whereas noninduced ovulators were monogamous (42%), multimale (33%), or polygynous (25%). Also, induced ovulators exhibited larger sexual dimorphism and smaller neonates than noninduced ovulators or felids. We suggest that induced ovulation evolved through sexual selection as a reproductive strategy beneficial for males (assurance of egg fertilization during short pair bonds) and females (postcopulatory mate choice based on level of stimulation causing induced ovulation).
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".