Maximizing mating opportunities: higher autumn swarming activity in male versus female<i>Myotis</i>bats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many animal taxa exhibit intersexual differences in sociality and resource selection that can result in variation in energy allocation budgets. Asymmetry of reproductive energetics between sexes can lead to intersexual variation in behavior to maximize lifetime reproductive success. Temperate bats show marked intersexual differences during summer when sexual segregation occurs. Although some intersexual differences have been shown in activities during the autumn mating period, they have not been examined in the context of fitness consequences for each sex. We studied autumn swarming activity of little brown and northern myotis bats (Myotis lucifugus and M. septentrionalis) in Nova Scotia, Canada, to test predictions of the hypothesis that intersexual variation in swarming behaviors occurs to maximize fitness. We conducted capture–mark–recapture surveys at swarming sites to characterize the nature and extent of intersexual variation in swarming activities. Relative to females, males occurred in disproportionally large numbers; had longer swarming seasons overlapping the female swarming season; and accounted for a disproportionately large number of recaptures at swarming sites suggesting that they had returned more frequently. No movements among swarming sites, which ranged in pairwise distance from 27.9 to 98.9 km, were detected for either species. Activity at swarming sites was highest early in the season for both species. As predicted, males engaged more frequently in swarming activities than females which likely reflect males maximizing opportunities for mating. Although their activities overlap during this period, differences suggest sex-specific activity budgets and it is likely that for each sex, individuals reconcile energetic constraints differently to maximize fitness.
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 | 0.001 | 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".