Condition dependence of female choosiness in a field cricket
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Females generally choose mates that produce the loudest, brightest or most elaborate sexual displays, and these costly male displays are predicted to be condition dependent. However, mate choice itself is a costly behaviour also expected to be condition dependent. Male fall field crickets, Gryllus pennsylvanicus, produce a conspicuous long-distance calling song that attracts females and is condition dependent. In this study, we tested the condition dependence of female preferences (preference function and choosiness) for male calling effort in G. pennsylvanicus. We manipulated female condition by raising crickets from hatching on either a low- or high-quality diet. In a series of two-speaker phonotaxis trials, both low- and high-condition females preferred playbacks reflecting greater calling effort. However, relative to low-condition females, high-condition females took significantly longer to make a choice, were more likely to fail to choose within the time allotted for a phonotaxis trial and significantly increased their latency to choose over the course of multiple trials. We discuss these results with respect to the possibility that female G. pennsylvanicus may be foraging for direct benefits when they choose their mates.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".