Older conservatives: reproduction in female Alpine chamois (<i>Rupicapra rupicapra</i>) is increasingly risk-averse with age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In long-lived mammals, costs of reproduction may vary with age. The terminal investment hypothesis predicts greater reproductive effort as females approach the end of their life expectancy. We monitored 97 individually marked female Alpine chamois (Rupicapra rupicapra (L., 1758)) between 2007 and 2013 to determine how age-specific reproduction affected body mass and subsequent reproductive success. We captured and weighed females between April and August and monitored reproductive success from April to October through mother–kid associations. Reproductive success was strongly age-dependent and peaked at 70% for prime-aged females (4–7 years). Reproductive senescence began at 8 years, earlier than reported by other studies of ungulates. There was no clear evidence of reproductive costs in any age class. Reproductive success was very heterogeneous for old females, suggesting variability in the onset of senescence. Old females were less likely to reproduce in poor years despite being heavier than prime-aged females, suggesting reproductive restraint in late life rather than terminal investment. Female mass remained stable from May to August with no effect of lactation. Our results suggest that chamois reproductive strategy becomes increasingly conservative with age, resulting in no detectable costs of reproduction.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".