MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2931412979 · doi:10.1098/rspb.2019.0286

Slower senescence in a wild insect population in years with a more female-biased sex ratio

2019· article· en· W2931412979 on OpenAlexaff
Rolando Rodríguez‐Muñoz, Jelle J. Boonekamp, David N. Fisher, Paul Hopwood, Tom Tregenza

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilEuropean CommissionSight Research UKLeverhulme Trust
KeywordsSex ratioSenescenceBiologyDemographyPopulationReproductionLife history theoryCompetition (biology)Affect (linguistics)Sex allocationEcologyLife historyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Life-history theories of senescence are based on the existence of a trade-off in resource allocation between body maintenance and reproduction. This putative trade-off means that environmental and demographic factors affecting the costs of reproduction should be associated with changes in patterns of senescence. In many species, competition among males is a major component of male reproductive investment, and hence variation in the sex ratio is expected to affect rates of senescence. We test this prediction using nine years of demographic and behavioural data from a wild population of the annual field cricket Gryllus campestris. Over these generations, the sex ratio at adulthood varied substantially, from years with an equal number of each sex to years with twice as many females as males. Consistent with the predictions of theory, we found that in years with a greater proportion of females, both sexes experienced a slower increase in mortality rate with age. Additionally, phenotypic senescence in males was slower in years when there were more females. Sex ratio did not affect the baseline mortality rate in males, but females suffered higher age-independent mortality rates when males were in short supply.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences→Same topicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction→French-language works237,207→