Genetic trade-offs between male reproductive traits in<i>Drosophila melanogaster</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
, males engage in both extensive pre- and post-copulatory competition for the opportunity to mate with females and subsequently sire offspring. The selection pressure for increased male reproductive success has resulted in the evolution of a wide diversity of sexual traits. However, despite strong selection, individuals often exhibit considerable phenotypic variation in the expression of these traits, and it is unclear if any of this variation is owing to underlying genetic trade-offs. Here, using hemiclonal flies, we examine how male reproductive success covaries with their ability to induce long-term stimulation of oogenesis and oviposition in their mates, and how this relationship may change over time. We found that males from hemiclone lines with phenotypes that were more successful in a short-term reproductive 'scramble' environment were less effective at stimulating long-term fecundity in females. Furthermore, we observed that males from hemiclone lines which showed the most improvement over a longer reproductive interaction period also tended to stimulate higher long-term fecundity in females. Together, these results indicate the presence of genetic trade-offs between different male reproductive traits and offer insights into the maintenance of their variation.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".