MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143531983 · doi:10.1098/rspb.2008.1459

Sexually antagonistic genetic variance for fitness in an ancestral and a novel environment

2009· article· en· W2143531983 on OpenAlexafffund
Matthieu Delcourt, Mark W. Blows, Howard D. Rundle

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsOntario GenomicsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsBiologyGenetic FitnessGenetic variationPopulationSelection (genetic algorithm)Range (aeronautics)Sexual selectionEvolutionary biologyDemographyGeneticsBiological evolutionGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The intersex genetic correlation for fitness , a standardized measure of the degree to which male and female fitness covary genetically, has consequences for important evolutionary processes, but few estimates are available and none have explored how it changes with environment. Using a half-sibling breeding design, we estimated the genetic (co)variance matrix (G) for male and female fitness, and the resulting , in Drosophila serrata. Our estimates were performed in two environments: the laboratory yeast food to which the population was well adapted and a novel corn food. The major axis of genetic variation for fitness in the two environments, accounting for 51.3 per cent of the total genetic variation, was significant and revealed a strong signal of sexual antagonism, loading negatively in both environments on males but positively on females. Consequently, estimates of were negative in both environments (-0.34 and -0.73, respectively), indicating that the majority of genetic variance segregating in this population has contrasting effects on male and female fitness. The possible strengthening of the negative in this novel environment may be a consequence of no history of selection for amelioration of sexual conflict. Additional studies from a diverse range of novel environments will be needed to determine the generality of this finding.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations84
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207