MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148403719 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0043088

What Does Carotenoid-Dependent Coloration Tell? Plasma Carotenoid Level Signals Immunocompetence and Oxidative Stress State in Birds–A Meta-Analysis

2012· review· en· W2148403719 on OpenAlexafffund
Mirre J. P. Simons, Alan A. Cohen, Simon Verhulst

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsCarotenoidImmunocompetenceBiologyOxidative stressTraitHonestyParusZoologyGeneticsBiochemistryPsychologyImmune systemSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mechanisms maintaining honesty of sexual signals are far from resolved, limiting our understanding of sexual selection and potential important parts of physiology. Carotenoid pigmented visual signals are among the most extensively studied sexual displays, but evidence regarding hypotheses on how carotenoids ensure signal honesty is mixed. Using a phylogenetically controlled meta-analysis of 357 effect sizes across 88 different species of birds, we tested two prominent hypotheses in the field: that carotenoid-dependent coloration signals i) immunocompetence and/or ii) oxidative stress state. Separate meta-analyses were performed for the relationships of trait coloration and circulating carotenoid level with different measures of immunocompetence and oxidative stress state. For immunocompetence we find that carotenoid levels (r = 0.20) and trait color intensity (r = 0.17) are significantly positively related to PHA response. Additionally we find that carotenoids are significantly positively related to antioxidant capacity (r = 0.10), but not significantly related to oxidative damage (r = -0.02). Thus our analyses provide support for both hypotheses, in that at least for some aspects of immunity and oxidative stress state the predicted correlations were found. Furthermore, we tested for differences in effect size between experimental and observational studies; a larger effect in observational studies would indicate that co-variation might not be causal. However, we detected no significant difference, suggesting that the relationships we found are causal. The overall effect sizes we report are modest and we discuss potential factors contributing to this, including differences between species. We suggest complementary mechanisms maintaining honesty rather than the involvement of carotenoids in immune function and oxidative stress and suggest experiments on how to test these.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.035
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.276
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.022 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations201
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207