Female Stick Insects Mate Multiply to Find Compatible Mates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Why females of many species mate multiply in the absence of direct benefits remains an open question in evolutionary ecology. Interacting and mating with multiple males can be costly to females in terms of time, resources, predation risk, and disease transmission. A number of indirect genetic benefits have been proposed to explain such behaviors, but the relative importance of these mechanisms in natural systems remains unclear. We tested for several direct and indirect benefits of polyandry in the walking stick Timema cristinae. We found no evidence of direct benefits with respect to longevity or fecundity. However, male × female genotypic interactions affected egg-hatching success and offspring production independent of relatedness, suggesting that mating with certain males benefits females and that the best male may differ for each female. Furthermore, multiply mated females biased paternity toward one or few males, and the extent of this bias was positively correlated to egg-hatching success. Our data, therefore, provide evidence for indirect benefits through compatibility effects in this species. By mating multiply, females may improve their chances of mating with a compatible male if compatibility cannot be assessed before mating. Such compatibility effects can explain the evolution and maintenance of polyandry in Timema and many other species.
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".