Sex‐specific life history responses to nymphal diet quality and immune status in a field cricket
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individual fitness is expected to benefit from earlier maturation at a larger body size and higher body condition. However, poor nutritional quality or high prevalence of disease make this difficult because individuals either cannot acquire sufficient resources or must divert resources to other fitness-related traits such as immunity. Under such conditions, individuals are expected to mature later at a smaller body size and in poorer body condition. Moreover, the juvenile environment can also produce longer-term effects on adult fitness by causing shifts in resource allocation strategies that could alter investment in immune function and affect adult lifespan. We manipulated diet quality and immune status of juvenile Texas field crickets, Gryllus texensis, to investigate how poor developmental conditions affect sex-specific investment in fitness-related traits. As predicted, a poor juvenile diet was related to smaller mass and body size at eclosion in both sexes. However, our results also reveal sexually dimorphic responses to different facets of the rearing environment: female life history decisions are affected more by diet quality, whereas males are affected more by immune status. We suggest that females respond to decreased nutritional income because this threatens their ability to achieve a large adult body size, whereas male fitness is more dependent on reaching adulthood and so they invest in immunity and survival to eclosion.
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) | 0.001 | 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".