Offspring sex ratio in mammals and the Trivers‐Willard hypothesis: In pursuit of unambiguous evidence
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Can mammalian mothers adaptively control the sex of their offspring? The influential Trivers-Willard hypothesis (TWH) proposes that when maternal condition increases the fitness of sons more than that of daughters, the proportion of sons produced should increase with maternal condition. Studies of mammals, however, often fail to support this hypothesis. This article highlights recent advances, including studies on the assumptions of the TWH and physiological mechanisms for sex-ratio manipulation. Particular emphasis is placed on how factors such as paternal quality, maternal reproductive costs and environmental conditions experienced by mothers early in life can mask/alter the expected relationship between maternal condition and offspring sex ratio or lead to apparent support for the TWH. While there is growing evidence that sex ratio around conception may be maternally and paternally manipulated, a challenge for future studies on sex allocation is to integrate how multiple and potentially opposite selective pressures affect offspring sex ratio.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it