Variation in selection pressure acting on body size by age and sex in a reverse sexual size dimorphic raptor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Body size strongly influences fitness, with larger individuals benefiting in terms of both greater productivity and survivorship; for reverse sexual size dimorphic (RSD) species, this relationship may be more complex. We examined the selection pressures acting on body size in male and female MerlinsFalco columbariusto assess whether larger or smaller individuals of thisRSDspecies were favoured in terms of survival and breeding performance. For males and females there were clear links between body size and survival but the exact relationship varied by sex. Among males, birds that survived each year class were larger than those that died and yearlings were on average smaller than older birds, but there were no measurable differences among adult males (age 2+). Among females, larger individuals aged 1 and 2 years were more likely to survive, but this size‐based pattern was not apparent in older age classes. Size early in life predicted the lifespan in male Merlins but not as strongly as for females and not for the largest individuals. Reproductive performance based on brood size was not associated with body size in either males or females, but there was a weak positive relationship between female body size and lifetime reproductive success. Selection appears to favour larger males and females but there is no indication that the population is evolving towards bigger individuals, perhaps in part due to selection against the largest birds. Increased survival may allow larger and higher quality individuals to occupy higher quality territories as they age and thereby to accrue greater lifetime reproductive success in the process.
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) | 0.001 | 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".