MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945266063 · doi:10.1002/ece3.5124

Female reproduction bears no survival cost in captivity for gray mouse lemurs

2019· article· en· W2945266063 on OpenAlexaff
Julie Landes, Pierre‐Yves Henry, Isabelle Hardy, Martine Perret, Samuel Pavard

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Evolution · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPrimate Behavior and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsLemurBiologyReproductionCaptivityLimitingEcologyZoologyPrimate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The survival cost of reproduction has been revealed in many free-ranging vertebrates. However, recent studies on captive populations failed to detect this cost. Theoretically, this lack of survival/reproduction trade-off is expected when resources are not limiting, but these studies may have failed to detect the cost, as they may not have fully accounted for potential confounding effects, in particular interindividual heterogeneity. Here, we investigated the effects of current and past reproductive effort on later survival in captive females of a small primate, the gray mouse lemur. Survival analyses showed no cost of reproduction in females; and the pattern was even in the opposite direction: the higher the reproductive effort, the higher the chances of survival until the next reproductive event. These conclusions hold even while accounting for interindividual heterogeneity. In agreement with aforementioned studies on captive vertebrates, these results remind us that reproduction is expected to be traded against body maintenance and the survival prospect only when resources are so limiting that they induce an allocation trade-off. Thus, the cost of reproduction has a major extrinsic component driven by environmental conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and EvolutionSame topicPrimate Behavior and EcologyFrench-language works237,207