MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143038906 · doi:10.1071/an10195

Relationships between rank-related behaviour, antler cycle timing and antler growth in deer: behavioural aspects

2011· article· en· W2143038906 on OpenAlexaff
Luděk Bartoš, George A. Bubenik

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Production Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntlerDominance (genetics)BiologyAgonistic behaviourEcologyDominance hierarchyZoologyAggressionPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this review we offer a synthesis of a 30-year-long investigation focussed on the relationship between dominance rank-related behaviour and the timing and growth of antlers in deer. Our studies related primarily to red and fallow deer. We present evidence to suggest that dominance-related behaviour in male deer is strong enough to influence both antler cycle timing and antler growth. In a study on captive red deer we observed that the males of higher rank cast their antlers first and also tended to shed the velvet earlier. In a subsequent series of studies on the same species we found evidence that social position and related agonistic activity of males during the period of antler growth influence antler size and branching. Changes in behaviour related to rank modified antler growth. For example, fallow deer bucks gaining higher rank through fighting other bucks exhibited enhanced growth of that part of the antler that was growing at that particular time. That substantially altered the entire antler growth. Understanding the relationship between rank, agonistic behaviour and hormone levels is crucial for the interpretation of previous results that showed a link between dominance rank and antler growth in deer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.183 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal Production ScienceSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207