Song and Sperm in Crickets: A Trade-off between Pre- and Post-copulatory Traits or Phenotype-Linked Fertility?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When females mate multiply (polyandry) both pre- and post-copulatory sexual selection can occur. Sperm competition theory predicts there should be a trade-off between investment in attracting mates and investment in ejaculate quality. In contrast, the phenotype-linked fertility hypothesis predicts a positive relationship should exist between investment in attracting mates and investment in ejaculate quality. Given the need to understand how pre- and post-copulatory sexual selection interacts, we investigated the relationship between secondary sexual traits and ejaculate quality using the European house cricket, Acheta domesticus. Although we found no direct relationship between cricket secondary sexual signals and ejaculate quality, variation in ejaculate quality was dependent on male body weight and mating latency: the lightest males produced twice as many sperm as the heaviest males but took longer to mate with females. Our findings are consistent with current theoretical models of sperm competition. Given light males may have lower mating success than heavy males because females take longer to mate with them in no-choice tests, light males may be exhibiting an alternative reproductive tactic by providing females with more living sperm. Together, our findings suggest that the fitness of heavy males may depend on pre-copulatory sexual selection, while the fitness of light males may depend on post-copulatory fertilization success.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".