A dominant allele controls development into female mimic male and diminutive female ruffs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maintaining polymorphisms for genes with effects of ecological significance may involve conflicting selection in males and females. We present data from a captive population of ruffs (Philomachus pugnax) showing that a dominant allele controls development into both small, 'female mimic' males ('faeders'), and a previously undescribed class of small 'female faeders'. Most male ruffs have elaborate breeding plumage and display behaviour, but 0.5-1.5% are faeders, which lack both. Females from a captive population previously lacking faeders were bred with two founder faeder males and their faeder sons. The faeders' offspring had a quadrimodal size distribution comprising normal-sized males and females, faeders and atypically small females. By contrast, ornamented males fathered only normal-sized offspring. We conclude that both founding faeders were heterozygous for a faeder allele absent from the original population. This allele is dominant to previously described genes that determine development into independent versus satellite ornamented males. Unlike those genes, the faeder allele is clearly expressed in females. Small body size is a component of the male faeder mating strategy, but provides no obvious benefit to females. Bisexual expression of the gene provides the opportunity to quantify the strength of sexually antagonistic selection on a Mendelian trait.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".