The consequences of polyandry for sibship structures, distributions of relationships and relatedness, and potential for inbreeding in a wild population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The evolutionary benefits of simultaneous polyandry (female multiple mating within a single reproductive event) remain elusive. One potential benefit could arise if polyandry alters sibship structures and consequent relationships and relatedness among females’ descendants, and thereby intrinsically reduces future inbreeding risk (the ‘indirect inbreeding avoidance hypothesis’). However such effects have not been quantified in naturally complex reproductive systems that also encompass iteroparity, overlapping generations, sequential polyandry, and polygyny. We used long-term social and genetic pedigree data from song sparrows ( Melospiza melodia ) to quantify cross-generational consequences of simultaneous polyandry for offspring sibship structures and distributions of relationships and relatedness among possible mates. Simultaneous polyandry decreased full-sibships and increased half-sibships on average, but such effects varied among females and were smaller than would occur in the absence of sequential polyandry or polygyny. Further, while simultaneous polyandry decreased the overall frequencies of possible matings among adult full-sibs, it increased the frequencies of possible matings among adult half-sibs and more distant relatives. These results imply that the intrinsic consequences of simultaneous polyandry for inbreeding risk could cause weak indirect selection on polyandry, but the magnitude and direction of such effects will depend on complex interactions with other mating system components and the form of inbreeding depression.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".