Sperm competition in tropical versus temperate zone birds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sperm competition represents an important component of post-copulatory sexual selection. It has been argued that the level of sperm competition declines in birds towards the equator. However, to date, sperm competition estimates have been available mainly for avian species inhabiting the northern temperate zone. Here we apply a novel approach, using the coefficient of between-male variation (CV(bm)) in sperm size as an index for sperm competition risk, in a comparative analysis of 31 Afrotropical and 99 northern temperate zone passerine species. We found no difference in sperm competition risk between the two groups, nor any relationship with migration distance. However, a multivariate model indicated that sperm competition risk was highest in species with a combination of low body mass and few eggs per clutch. The effect of clutch size was most pronounced in tropical species, which indicates that sperm competition risk in tropical and temperate species is differently associated with particular life-history traits. Although tropical species had lower sperm competition risk than temperate zone species for overlapping clutch sizes, the idea of a generally reduced risk of sperm competition in tropical birds was not supported by our analysis.
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".