Comparing population level sexual selection in a species with alternative reproductive tactics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The description of a species' mating patterns is often based on observations from a single exemplar population; however, environmental variation can lead to variation in mating patterns and to differences in the strength of sexual selection among populations.In this study, we explored how resource distribution across a species' range affects competition and the strength of sexual selection in a northern and southern population of plainfin midshipman (Porichthys notatus), a species with 2 male reproductive tactics.Male plainfin midshipman can be guarders that compete for nest sites and court females, or sneakers that attempt to steal fertilizations from the guarder males during spawning.Males from the north population grow larger, suggesting that there might be more competition among males in the north.However, we found that the variance in body size and in nest availability were similar between populations, suggesting instead a similar degree of male-male competition.We found no significant population differences in reproductive success (north: 517 ± 50 eggs/nest ± SE; south: 412 ± 68 eggs/nest ± SE), paternity (north: 52%; south: 58% for the guarding male), or tactic frequencies (north: 88% guarders; south: 91% guarders).There was a marginally steeper Bateman gradient in the south population but no difference at 8 other measures of the strength of sexual selection between the 2 populations.Thus, despite a wide geographic distance, our results show remarkable conservation of mating patterns between the north and south populations of this benthic toadfish.
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".