Effects of body size on male mating tactics and paternity in black bears,<i>Ursus americanus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reproductive behaviour of large, solitary mammals is difficult to study. Owing to their secretive nature and wide-ranging habits, aspects of male mating behaviour are poorly documented in solitary than in social species. We used radiotelemetry and microsatellite DNA analysis to investigate the influence of body size on male mating tactics and short-term reproductive success in the black bear, Ursus americanus, a solitary carnivore. We investigated male ranging behaviour and documented male encounters with breeding females to determine whether males employed conditional mating tactics according to their body sizes. We found that male home-range sizes were not positively associated with body size, but encounter rates with breeding females were. Although all males searched widely for females, mating access appeared to be largely determined by fighting ability. Large males encountered more breeding females and had more frequent encounters during the females' estimated receptive periods than did small- and medium-sized males. Paternity was highly skewed toward the three dominant males who fathered 91% of the cubs sampled during the 3-year study. Paternity was correlated with the frequency of male encounters during female receptive periods. Male encounters, however, overestimated the success of medium-sized males and underestimated the overall variance in male reproductive success. Multiple paternity occurred in two of seven litters, indicating that sperm competition is important in black bear mating behaviour. Implications for male lifetime reproductive success are discussed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".