Ventral colour polymorphism correlates with alternative behavioural patterns in female common lizards (<i>Lacerta vivipara</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the common lizard, female competition for resources is likely to be a strong selective pressure that has enhanced the evolution of conspicuous traits. Female common lizards display a polymorphism in ventral colour correlated with differences in reproduction, dispersal, and susceptibility to resource competition. We tested the hypothesis that this polymorphism is correlated with differences in behaviour in a social context. We studied the agonistic behaviour (aggression and avoidance) and social stress of females of different colours during laboratory-staged encounters with a limiting resource. We found that the behaviour of females was affected by their own colour, or the colour of their opponent, or both. Such alternative behavioural patterns might reflect differences in competitive ability. Orange females were the least aggressive and the most likely to avoid social interactions, and thus could be a weaker competitor. Yellow females were rarely exposed to aggression and often made their opponents flee, and thus might have higher resource-holding potential. Mixed females were aggressive but were also often exposed to aggression, and displayed the highest stress level, which could be characteristic of an intermediate or condition-dependent resource-holding potential. The possibility that ventral colour is used in social interactions to signal resource-holding potential is 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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".