Duration of courtship displays corresponds to social status in male greater sac-winged bats (Saccopteryx bilineata)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In species with complex courtship displays, male courtship performance is often used by females to assess male quality. The greater sac-winged bat ( Saccopteryx bilineata (Temminck, 1838)) lives in a harem-based resource-defence polygyny. Courting males perform complex hover displays in front of roosting females. Males differ in their social status by having females permanently or sporadically in their day-roost territory (harem males vs. nonharem males). We compared the frequency and duration of hover displays from harem and nonharem males in free-living colonies. Male social status was correlated with male age and the number of females being courted; thus, these two effects were removed to compare the frequency and duration of hover displays for harem and nonharem males. The frequency of hover displays per hour did not differ between harem and nonharem males, whereas the mean duration of hover displays was linked to male social status, with harem males exhibiting significantly longer hover displays than nonharem males. When analysing each social status separately, the hover display duration of both harem and nonharem males was neither influenced by the number of competing males nor by the number of females being courted. Male age did not influence the hover display duration of nonharem males; however, it had a significant effect on the hover display duration of harem males, with older harem males hovering significantly longer than younger harem males. Because females are free to choose in which male territory to roost, they might use the duration of hover displays to evaluate the quality of courting males.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".