MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2256728287 · doi:10.1002/ajp.22530

Paternal kin recognition and infant care in white‐faced capuchins (<i>Cebus capucinus</i>)

2016· article· en· W2256728287 on OpenAlexafffund
Elizabeth Sargeant, Eva C. Wikberg, Shoji Kawamura, Katharine M. Jack, Linda M. Fedigan

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Primatology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPrimate Behavior and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsKin recognitionWhite (mutation)ZoologyBiologyCommunicationPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evidence for paternal kin recognition and paternally biased behaviors is mixed among primates. We investigate whether infant handling behaviors exhibit paternal kin biases in wild white-faced capuchins monkeys (Cebus capucinus) by comparing interactions between infants and genetic sires, potential sires, siblings (full sibling, maternal, and paternal half-siblings) and unrelated handlers. We used a linear mixed model approach to analyze data collected on 21 focal infants from six groups in Sector Santa Rosa, Costa Rica. Our analyses suggest that the best predictor of adult and subadult male interactions with an infant is the male's dominance status, not his paternity status. We found that maternal siblings but not paternal siblings handled infants more than did unrelated individuals. We conclude that maternal but not paternal kinship influence patterns of infant handling in white-faced capuchins, regardless of whether or not they can recognize paternal kin. Am. J. Primatol. 78:659-668, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.852

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of PrimatologySame topicPrimate Behavior and EcologyFrench-language works237,207