Female mice mate preferentially with non-parasitized males
Bibliographic record
Abstract
If parasitic infection is a driving force in female mate choice, then females should preferentially select parasite-free males. The role of infection on female mate choice in mammals was assessed using a 3-chambered apparatus. A female CD-1 mouse was allowed to choose between 2 tethered male mice, 1 uninfected and 1 infected with 200 larvae (L3) of the intestinal nematode Heligmosomoides polygyrus. Both uninfected and infected males were equally receptive to the oestrous females, and females did not differ in the number of visits and time spent exploring the 2 males. Female time preference was not a useful predictor of ultimate mate choice, whereas first mount preference of the female was a reliable indicator. Results indicate that female mice preferentially mated with uninfected males as evidenced by first ejaculation choice, but that male infection status did not significantly affect female reproductive success. Interestingly, litters sired by infected males contained a significantly higher percentage of females suggesting that parasite-induced hormonal changes may alter the sex ratio of the offspring. This study provides the first direct evidence of the impact of parasitic infection on mammalian mate choice.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".